G.R. No. L-14862; May 31, 1961
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. APOLONIO ANDIA, alias SOFRONIO, ET AL., defendants. APOLONIO ANDIA alias SOFRONIO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Apolonio Andia was convicted of murder for the killing of policeman Jaime Lucana. The incident began when Ciriaco Andia refused to pay for tuba, leading to a confrontation with Lucana. Ciriaco, along with his brothers Iniego and Restituto, then assaulted Lucana. During the struggle, Sgt. Crispin Afable intervened but was pushed away. Afable then saw Apolonio Andia holding a knife, ordered him to drop it, and gave chase when Apolonio fled. Apolonio evaded pursuit and returned to the scene shortly after.
Upon his return, Apolonio stabbed Lucana while the victim was being restrained and overpowered by his three brothers. Lucana was brought to the hospital where, before dying, he gave an ante mortem statement identifying Apolonio as his assailant. The prosecution presented multiple eyewitnesses, including Alberto Abenis and Julio Bocal, who consistently testified to seeing Apolonio deliver the fatal stab. The defense, however, presented an alibi and claimed that it was Iniego who stabbed Lucana in self-defense.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) the credibility of the prosecution witnesses versus the defense’s alibi and alternative narrative; and (2) whether the qualifying circumstance of treachery was present to elevate the killing to murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the prosecution’s evidence, particularly the positive and credible testimonies of eyewitnesses, to be conclusive. Witnesses Abenis and Bocal provided a clear and consistent account of Apolonio’s actions: fleeing from Sgt. Afable and returning to stab the helpless victim. Their lack of motive to falsely testify bolstered their credibility. The dying declaration of Lucana, as corroborated by Dr. Bocar and Justice of the Peace Solidon, further cemented Apolonio’s guilt. The Court rejected the alibi as weak, noting it was unsupported by credible evidence and could not prevail over positive identification.
On the issue of treachery, the Court ruled it was correctly appreciated. Apolonio did not participate in the initial scuffle. He arrived later, and his act of stabbing Lucana—who was then immobilized and held by his brothers—constituted a deliberate and sudden attack that ensured the execution without risk to himself. This method, consciously adopted, qualified the killing as murder. The Court also noted the aggravating circumstance of disregard of the victim’s rank as a police officer in the performance of duty, which was offset by the mitigating circumstance of the appellant’s lack of instruction. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was thus affirmed.