GR L 81470; (October, 1988) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-81470 October 27, 1988
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VIRGILIO TUNHAWAN, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The accused, Virgilio Tunhawan, was convicted of murder by the Regional Trial Court for shooting Virgilio Lugmay in the back on October 16, 1984, in Barangay Dahilayan, Bukidnon. The prosecution presented eyewitness Artemio Tanasio, who testified that while he and the victim were waiting near a plaza, he heard a gunshot, saw Lugmay hit, and then observed the accused approximately ten meters away holding a Garand rifle in a firing position. This account was corroborated by another witness, Delfin Levanta. The defense centered on alibi, with Tunhawan claiming he had been in hiding in Malaybalay since October 1, 1984, due to a fear of the victim’s father, and was not present at the crime scene. A longstanding feud existed between the Tunhawan and Lugmay families, with a prior agreement that the Lugmays would not enter Dahilayan.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused based on the prosecution’s evidence and in appreciating the qualifying and aggravating circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected, as it was not physically impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene and was uncorroborated. The positive identification by eyewitnesses, who were familiar with the accused, prevails over a weak alibi. The Court upheld the finding of treachery (alevosia), which qualified the killing as murder. The victim was shot suddenly from behind while sitting on a parked motorcycle and eating, rendering him utterly unable to defend himself from the attack.
However, the Court disagreed with the trial court’s appreciation of the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and use of a firearm to weaken the defense. The killing appeared to be a sudden reaction upon seeing the victim in a prohibited area, not a product of cool deliberation. The use of the rifle, by itself, does not constitute a means to weaken the defense, and such circumstance would be absorbed by treachery anyway. With no other aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty for murder is reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court modified the sentence to an indeterminate penalty of twelve (12) years and six (6) months of reclusion temporal as minimum to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal as maximum. The civil indemnity was affirmed.