G.R. No. 110405 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. VIRGILIO TAÑEDO, BERLITO LACHICA, AND DANILO MERCADAL, ACCUSED-.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered CONVICTING the accused (MERCURIO LEMINA, DANILO MERCADAL, VIRGILIO TAÑEDO, BERLITO LACHICA, JESUS LACHICA and ENRICO 'BOY' GEPAYA) of the crime of MURDER as charged in the information and applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, hereby sentences each of them to suffer the penalty of TWELVE (12) YEARS of prision mayor to TWENTY (20) YEARS of reclusion temporal. To indemnify the heirs of deceased Domingo Nepal in the amount of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00) and to suffer the accessory penalties of the law. Accused Mercurio Lemina, a detention prisoner, is hereby credited in full of his preventive imprisonment. [2] Of the accused only Virgilio Tañedo, Berlito Lachica, Jesus Lachica and Danilo Mercadal appealed their conviction to the Court of Appeals. Pending their appeal, however, Jesus Lachica died on 27 March 1991 at the New Bilibid Prison Hospital. Parenthetically, the appellate court in a resolution of 8 August 1991 declared the criminal and civil liabilities of Jesus Lachica extinguished pursuant to Art. 89 of the Revised Penal Code, and deemed his appeal closed and terminated. On 14 January 1993 the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court with the modification that accused-appellants be sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered them to indemnify the heirs of Domingo Nepal in the amount of P50,000.00. Accordingly, it certified the case to us for review pursuant to Rule 124, Sec. 13, of the Rules of Court. [3] Accused-appellants assign the following errors: (1) the misappreciation of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses; (2) the declaration of their culpability for murder; and, (3) the declaration that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that they committed the crime of murder. Appellants argue that their conviction was based entirely on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Had the testimonies of the defense witnesses been considered, there would have been no evidence to sustain a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They also contend that the trial court misappreciated the testimony of prosecution witness Maxima Remuyan and that of defense witness Sofio Pollo. Maxima testified that she was then 4 meters away when she heard her son Domingo utter the words, "tama na Mer, tama na Boy," referring to Mercurio Lemina and Enrico Boy Gepaya, thus corroborating the statement of Sofio Pollo that there were only 3 men fighting, i.e., Lemina, Gepaya and victim Domingo Nepal. There is no merit in the appeal. It is settled that findings of fact of the trial court pertaining to the credibility of witnesses command great weight and respect since it had the opportunity to observe their demeanor while they testified in court. [4] There is no reason for us in this case to depart from this established rule. We agree with the People that the lower court did not disregard the testimonies of the defense witnesses. It simply found their testimonies unbelievable while t