SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 135619. January 15, 2004]

ADONIS ARADILLOS and ALBINO GALABO, petitioners, vs. O!R"
O# A$$%ALS and &'( $%O$L% O# ")% $)ILI$$IN%S,
r(*r(+(n&(d ,y &'( O--./( o- &'( So0./.&or G(n(ra0, respondents.
D % I S I O N
A!S"RIA12AR"IN%3, J.4
For review is the decision dated February 12, 1998 o the Court o !""ea#s
in C!$%&'& C' No& 1()1*,
+1,
air-in. the conviction o "etitioners !donis
!radi##os and !#bino %a#abo o the cri-e o Frustrated /o-icide, with
-odiication as to the "ena#ty and the award o actua# and -ora# da-a.es&
!n Inor-ation was i#ed beore the 'e.iona# 0ria# Court 12ranch 134 o
Davao City, char.in. "etitioners !radi##os and %a#abo with the cri-e o
Frustrated 5urder, co--itted as o##ows6
That on or about February 3, 1992, in the City of Davao, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this onorable Court, the above!"entioned accused, ar"ed with an a#
and piece of wood, conspirin$, confederatin$ to$ether and helpin$ one another, with
intent to %ill and ta%in$ advanta$e of their superior stren$th, willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously attac%ed, assaulted and hac%ed with said a# and struc% with said piece of
wood, one &loria 'lviola thereby inflictin$ upon the latter the followin$ injuries, to
wit(
C)*P)+,D F-'CT+-., /-0 ',D /10 F-),T'1 '-.' 2 T) 'C23,&
4)+,D &C5 16 -15 1
which injuries would cause the death of the said &loria 'lviola, thus perfor"in$ all
the acts of e#ecution which should have produced the cri"e of *urder as a
conse7uence, but, nevertheless did not produce it by reason of causes independent of
his will, that is, by the ti"ely arrival and intervention of co"plainant8s brother!in!laws
and the able "edical assistance rendered to the said &loria 'lviola which prevented
her death9
C),T-'-: T) 1'49
;2<
7etitioners "#eaded not .ui#ty to the char.e
+),
and thereater, tria# on the -erits
ensued&
0he "rosecution and the deense dier in their versions o the incident&
0he .ist o the "rosecution evidence is as o##ows6
!t around 8698 in the aternoon o February ), 1992, %#oria rebu:ed herein
"etitioners !radi##os and %a#abo when she saw the- in the act o cuttin. the
ba-boo brid.e #ocated on the "ro"erty o her husband& 0hereu"on,
"etitioners chased her and they cau.ht u" with her near the house& %a#abo
then hit her severa# ti-es with a "iece o wood and his car"entry ba. causin.
her to a## down& ;hi#e %#oria was sta..erin. ace down, !radi##os hac:ed her
twice with a car"entry a<, hittin. her on the ri.ht side o the head and on the
orehead& She as:ed or he#" ro- the Visto a-i#y, her nei.hbors, who
brou.ht her to the c#inic o Dr& !#vare= in 5atina, Davao& !ter Dr& !#vare=
.ave her irst aid treat-ent, %#oria was advised to .o to Davao 5edica#
Center where she was conined in the IC> or our days&
+9,
!t the ti-e %#oria re"roached "etitioners, she was within her ba-boo$
enced yard, about ten -eters away ro- the-& /er house is #ocated ive to
si< -eters away ro- the "#ace where she was standin.& /er chi#dren,
'osa#ito
+8,
and 'odi#yn, and her sister$in$#aw, 'osa, were a#so within the
"re-ises& 7etitioners cut their way throu.h her c#osed ba-boo .ate and they
overtoo: her whi#e she was runnin. towards her house& !ter she was in?ured,
her chi#dren brou.ht her to the Visto a-i#y@s house which is #ocated 233
-eters away& 5eanwhi#e, 'osa ran to the !#sa 5asa detach-ent to re"ort
the incident& %#oria@s our brothers$in$#aw, na-e#y6 'oberto, 5odesto, Eren
and Ni#o, and her sister$in$#aw, 5i.ue#a were a#so within the "re-ises but
were not ab#e to he#" her because they were nervous&
+*,
On the other hand, "etitioners invo:e se#$deense, contendin. that the
victi-@s in?uries on the head were the resu#t o the stru..#e or the "ossession
o the a< between her and "etitioner !radi##os& 7etitioners, who are both
car"enters, recounted that on their way ho-e ro- wor: in the aternoon o
February ), 1992, they sto""ed by the wooden brid.e where they usua##y
"ass because o an u"rooted Aidyo:B tree that obstructed their
"assa.e& 7etitioner %a#abo started cuttin. o the roots o the tree with his
car"entry a<& 2ut u"on seein. the-, %#oria who had been drin:in. AtubaB with
her brothers$in$#aw, shouted invectives at the- and threw stones at
%a#abo& ;hen %a#abo was hit on his #et rib, he ran or cover at a nearby
coconut tree& 7etitioner !radi##os too: over the cuttin. o the tree& %#oria
continued throwin. stones& 0hen, she a""roached !radi##os and .rabbed the
a< ro- hi-& ;hi#e the two .ra""#ed or its "ossession, %#oria@s brothers$in$
#aw were throwin. stones at %a#abo& In the course o the stru..#e between
!radi##os and %#oria, the a< hit the #atter& Seein. that %#oria was in?ured,
!radi##os ran away, o##owed by %a#abo& !radi##os "assed by his house, #et
the a< there, then, went direct#y to the "uro: #eader, 2en?a-in !utida, to who-
he surrendered&
+(,
0he tria# court be#ieved the "rosecution@s account, indin. that the nature o
the in?uries sustained by %#oria cou#d not have been caused durin. the
stru..#e between her and "etitioner !radi##os& 0hus, the tria# court convicted
"etitioners o the cri-e o Frustrated /o-icide and sentenced the-, as
o##ows6
4.-.F)-., findin$ the $uilt of the two /20 accused, 'donis 'radillos and 'lbino
&alabo, proven beyond reasonable doubt of Frustrated o"icide and findin$ in their
favor the provisions of 'rt9 26= of the -evised Penal Code, they are hereby sentenced
to an i"prison"ent of ),. /10 :.'- each and pay the costs9
For the civil liability, they are ordered to pay jointly and severally, the su"
of P1=,===9== for "edical e#penses and "oral da"a$es, of the victi"9
5) )-D.-.D9
;><
On a""ea#, in sustainin. the tria# court@s indin.s, the Court o !""ea#s
noted that it is Aunnatura# and contrary to ordinary hu-an e<"erience or a
wo-an, a#one and unar-ed, to run towards the two -a#e a""e##ants and
.ra""#e or the "ossession o an a<e&B
+9,
0he a""e##ate court -odiied the
"ena#ty i-"osed on "etitioners and the da-a.es awarded in avor o the
victi-,
+13,
as o##ows6
ACCORDINGLY, the jud$"ent of conviction is hereby AFFIRMED with the
followin$ "odifications(
10 The accused appellants are sentenced to suffer an i"prison"ent ran$in$ fro"
two /20 years, four /?0 "onths and one /10 day of prision correccional as "ini"u", to
ei$ht />0 years and one /10 day of prision "ayor as "a#i"u"@ and
20 They are ordered to pay the victi" jointly and severally, the su" of
P1,AA?9== for "edical e#penses as actual da"a$es, and PA,===9== as "oral da"a$es9
5) )-D.-.D9
;11<
In their "etition or review on certiorari, "etitioners c#ai- that the Court o
!""ea#s@ air-ance o their conviction with -odiication is not in accordance
with #aw, the a""#icab#e decisions o this Court and the evidence on record&
It is sett#ed that an a""ea# in a cri-ina# case throws the who#e case wide
o"en or review
+12,
and it beco-es the duty o the Court to correct such errors
as -ay be ound in the ?ud.-ent a""ea#ed ro-, whether they are assi.ned
as errors or not&
+1),
!t the outset, the Court notes that whi#e the -e-oranda o the "arties and
their a""ea# bries ocused on "etitioners@ c#ai- o se#$deense, their evidence
is actua##y rooted on the testi-ony o "etitioner !radi##os that the a<
accidenta##y hit %#oria durin. the stru..#e or its "ossession between the-,
thus6
C 2eore the woundin. incident ha""ened, what were you doin.D
! I was #oo:in. at !#bino %a#abo who was cuttin. the roots o the Aidyo:B&
C ;here was that Aidyo:B #ocated at that ti-e whi#e you were watchin. !#bino %a#abo
cuttin. itD
! 0he Aidyo:B was a#on. the brid.e where it was a##en and which !#bino cut&
& & &
C !nd whi#e %a#abo was cuttin. the Aidyo:B, what ha""ened ne<tD
! /e was stoned by %#oria !#vio#a&
& & &
C ;hat e#se trans"ired aside ro- the stonin. incidentD
A S'( +'ou&(d4 526a ,a6a 7o u6 na8on6. 26a +9ua&&(r 7o. 26a 6a67ay ra
,a 7o u6 0a8a+.: ;<ou ar( +'a7(0(++. <ou ar( +9ua&&(r+. you 'a=( +7a00
,od.(+.>
C /ow did you co-e to :now that %#oria !#vio#a threw stones at !#bino %a#aboD
! 2ecause I saw her&
& & &
C Eet us .o bac: to the stonin. incident& Fou said %#oria threw stones at %a#abo
whi#e %a#abo was cuttin. the Aidyo:B and %#oria at the sa-e ti-e uttered those
words you ?ust have Guoted, what ha""ened to %a#abo, i any, in resu#t o the
stonin. o %#oriaD
! %a#abo was hit at his ri.ht rib ca.e&
C !nd what ha""ened to %a#aboD
! /e was in "ain&
C ;hat e#se did he do, i anyD
! I .ot the a<e which %a#abo used in cuttin. the Aidyo:B to continue cuttin. the said
Aidyo:B, but %#oria continuous#y threw stones to us and then she .rabbed the a<e
ro- -y hands&
& & &
C I wi## urther c#ariy, Four /onor& /ow did it ha""en that %#oria, the one you said
threw stones at %a#abo was ab#e to wrest#e with you or the "ossession o the a<eD
! She rushed at -e&
C !ter rushin. at you, what did %#oria doD
! She .ra""#ed with -e or the "ossession o the a<e&
C In re#ation to the wooden brid.e, in what "articu#ar s"ot or area were you .ra""#in.
or "ossession o the a<eD
! !t the ed.e o the brid.e&
C Can you de-onstrate to the /onorab#e Court how the .ra""#in. or "ossession o
the a<e ha""ened between you and %#oriaD
! 1;itness de-onstrated that he "#aced his ri.ht hand at the #ower "ortion o the
hand#e o the a<eH that %#oria@s ri.ht hand was ho#din. the -idd#e "ortionH and that
his #et hand was ho#din. the u""er "ortionH and that %#oria@s other hand was on
to" o his hand&4
+19,
1E-"hasis su""#ied4
On cross$e<a-ination, !radi##os urther de-onstrated how %#oria
sustained her in?uries6
C Now, with that :ind o i##ustration, 5r& !radi##os, how did %#oria sustain the in?uries
because you said that it was in the course o .ra""oin. 1sic4D ;i## you "#ease
de-onstrate to the Court how the in?uries o %#oria !#vio#a was in#ictedD
! 1;itness -a:es a de-onstration4
I
!SS0& CI0F 7'OS& C!EIJO6
;e wou#d #i:e to -a:e o record that in his ear#ier de-onstration %#oria was
ho#din. the -idd#e "ortion and the u""er "ortion o the a<e& ;as that the "osition
o the a<e durin. that ti-eD
! Fes& So-eti-es it swun. #i:e this $ the b#ade so-eti-es aced -eH so-eti-es it
aced her&
C /ow did she sustain the woundD
! S'( 8a+ a//.d(n&a00y .n?ur(d ,(/au+( o- &'( -or/( o- &'( 6ra**0.n6&
I
C !t that ti-e you "ushed the a<e, was that the "osition o your handsD
! No -a@a-& B(/au+( o- &'( +8.n6.n6, I 8a+ a,0( &o *u+' .& a//.d(n&a00y
&o8ard+ G0or.a&
+18,
1E-"hasis Ours4
!ccident and se#$deense are two inco-"atib#e deenses& !ccident
"resu""oses #ac: o intention, whi#e se#$deense assu-es vo#untariness, but
induced on#y by necessity&
+1*,
In view o the above$Guoted assertions o "etitioner !radi##os beore the
tria# court, the Court ado"ts a -ore #ibera# stance by disre.ardin. the a""arent
con#ict in the deense raised by "etitioners in their "#eadin.s& !ter a##, court
#iti.ations are "ri-ari#y or the search or truth, and a #ibera# inter"retation o
the ru#es by which both "arties are .iven the u##est o""ortunity to adduce
"roos is the best way to erret out such truth&
+1(,
In People vs. Court of Appeals,
+18,
the Court ru#ed that when, durin. the tria#
o the case, an accused c#ai-s that the cri-e was the resu#t o an accident,
the burden o "rovin. se#$deense wi## not co-e into "#ay, to wit6
B 3t is noteworthy that durin$ the trial, petitioner Tan$an did not invo%e self!defense
but clai"ed that &eneroso was accidentally shot9 's such, the burden of provin$ self!
defense, which nor"ally would have belon$ed to Tan$an, did not co"e into
play9 Although Tangan must prove his defense of accidental firing by clear and
convincing evidence, the burden of proving the commission of the crime
remained in the prosecution9
;19<
/."phasis supplied0
!ccordin.#y, "etitioners need not dischar.e the burden o "rovin. se#$
deense, a#thou.h they -ust "rove their deense o accidenta# in#iction o
in?uries on the victi-, by c#ear and convincin. evidence& On the "rosecution
re-ains the burden o "rovin. the co--ission o the cri-e beyond
reasonab#e doubt&
It is not dis"uted that %#oria sustained hac:in. in?uries&