THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs.

GABINO ABELLERA
G.R. No. L-23533, August 1, 1925
Street, J.

FACTS:
Gabino Abellera was the caretaker and foreman at the Mansion House in
Baguio. On October 7, 1924, one of the two gardeners, Day-Ag, was found
severely wounded in his room. The victim said that the accused-appellant is his
perpetrator to his co-workers who found him. He could also point to the accused-
appellant as the one who stabbed him in front of the responding police. The
accused-appellant was also ordered to ask the victim if the former did stab him.
The victim affirmed that Abellera was the one who stabbed him.
Day-Ag was taken to the hospital, but he was told that he might not last long
due to his condition. Hence, the authorities took a dying declaration from him
regarding the crime. Day-Ag still positively pointed out Abellera and said that
Abellera believed he was the one who reported to the director of engineering that a
woman in the Mansion House was improperly visiting Abellera. More people also
were told by the victim that the accused-appellant did such a heinous crime to him
before he passed away after a day or two.
During the trial, two of the deceased co-workers testified that, before the
commission of the crime, Abellera was already showing odd behaviors, and the
latter even admonished his intention to kill the person who reported him to the
Director of Engineering. An attempt was also made on the part of the appellant's
lawyer to destroy the weight of Day-ag's declaration because Day-ag was an Igorot
and, therefore, a pagan. They claim that, generally, Igorrotes have no belief in a
possible future life or a doctrine of future rewards and punishment. It was urged
that this circumstance destroys the weight of Day-ag's statements.
Abellera was later found guilty of the homicide based mainly on the weight
of the deceased. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for fourteen years,
eight months, and one day, reclusion temporal, to indemnify the heirs of Day-Ag,
in the amount of P500 and to pay the costs.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the repeated declarations of the deceased are enough to
penalize the accused of reclusion temporal.

RULING:
 Yes. The declarations made by the victim are enough evidence to convict the
accused of his crime and enough to be penalized by reclusion temporal.
In the Supreme Court’s ruling, there was no error in the lower court’s
decision that the testimonies made by the deceased were enough for conviction. It
also does not matter if the deceased was a pagan, as contested by the accused-
appellant’s party, because the deceased’s testimonies were properly admitted in
evidence as competent proof against the accused. The Supreme Court ruled that
those testimonies have the weight of a dying declaration due to the deceased’s
condition when the testimonies were taken. Additionally, upon review, Abellera
undoubtedly had the opportunity to commit the crime against the deceased. It was
found that the accused-appellant’s belief that someone was reporting him to the
Director of Engineering does not even exist. If it were, Abellera gravely committed
an error of accusing and killing the deceased. Lastly, no amount of good character,
as introduced in the lower court, is sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt.
Hence, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision that Abellera
should be sentenced to reclusion temporal in accordance with the law.