G.R. No. L-31440 November 23, 1988
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFREDO BANDOQUILLO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The case stemmed from an incident on February 3, 1968, following a dance in Sitio Lilihan, Negros Oriental. A dispute arose at the dance involving the deceased, Leoncio Saguban, and Franco Divinagracia over the use of a record player. Later, as the Saguban family was walking home, they were pursued by a group including accused-appellant Alfredo Bandoquillo, a barrio police officer. Bandoquillo confronted Leoncio’s father, Aurelio, and upon learning Leoncio was hiding, slapped the old man. When Leoncio emerged from hiding, Bandoquillo suddenly stabbed him in the back. Leoncio was brought to the hospital but died the next morning from the wound. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses, including Leoncio’s sister Antonia, who identified Bandoquillo as the assailant.
The defense presented a different version, claiming it was another man, Ernesto Raaging, who stabbed Leoncio during a struggle. Defense witnesses Olimpio Ramirez and Barangay Captain Guillermo Esparcia testified to this effect. However, their testimonies were weakened on cross-examination; Ramirez admitted he did not see a weapon in Raaging’s hand and could not confirm Leoncio was unwounded before he saw them on the ground. The trial court found Bandoquillo guilty of murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted accused-appellant Alfredo Bandoquillo of murder, and if not, what is the proper crime and penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from murder to homicide and reduced the penalty. The Court found the prosecution evidence, particularly the credible and consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses Antonia Saguban and Rolando Caballero, sufficient to establish Bandoquillo’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Their positive identification outweighed the defense’s denial and the contradictory testimonies of Ramirez and Esparcia, which the Court found unreliable. However, the Court ruled that the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation were not proven. The attack, while sudden, did not constitute treachery (alevosia) because the victim had emerged from hiding and placed himself in a position of confrontation, indicating the attack was not deliberately and consciously adopted to ensure execution without risk to the assailant. Evident premeditation was absent as there was no proof of sufficient time for reflection and persistence in the criminal intent between the initial altercation and the stabbing.
Thus, the crime committed is homicide, punishable by reclusion temporal. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law and considering no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the Court imposed a penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity was increased from P12,000 to P30,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The appealed decision was modified accordingly.