G.R. No. 125434 December 22, 1999
DELFIN ABALOS, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, RTC-Br. 38, LINGAYEN, PANGASINAN, and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Delfin Abalos was charged with murder for shooting Liberato Damias on January 27, 1993. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Veronica Bulatao, testified that Abalos, a spurned suitor, was seen prowling near her house before suddenly appearing at the door and shooting the victim at close range while he was seated and unaware. The defense interposed alibi, claiming Abalos was working in tobacco fields during the incident, corroborated by several witnesses. The trial court convicted Abalos of murder, but the Court of Appeals modified this to homicide, finding treachery not proven.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the killing was not attended by treachery, thereby convicting the petitioner of homicide instead of murder.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the murder conviction. The legal logic is that treachery (alevosia) is present when the offender employs means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense the offended party might make. Here, the victim was unarmed, seated inside a house, and conversing with Veronica when Abalos, without any warning, suddenly appeared at the door in a semi-kneeling position and shot him at very close range. This mode of attack, executed deliberately and unexpectedly, deprived the victim of any opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, thereby qualifying the killing to murder. The Court found the positive identification by the eyewitness, who knew Abalos well and was in a well-lit area, to be credible and sufficient to overcome the weak defense of alibi, which was not physically impossible. The generic aggravating circumstance of recidivism, admitted by the petitioner, was also properly appreciated.