G.R. Nos. 96943-45. January 20, 1995.
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Alex Abitona, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of September 27, 1984, Arsenito Dagacay and his family were having supper at their home in Naawan, Misamis Oriental when they were fired upon by assailants outside their house. Arsenito was killed, and his children Arcie and Gina were wounded. Nine-year-old Arcie, though injured, managed to leave the house and saw three armed men departing. He recognized one of them as Alex Abitona from a distance of about seven meters, identifying him by face and name, as his father had previously identified Abitona as a bodyguard of the local mayor. Another neighbor, Lydia Dagiaposo, also witnessed three armed men leaving the scene and identified Abitona and Lito Cruz. Initial police inaction prompted the family to seek help from the NBI, leading to the filing of charges years later.
Abitona denied involvement, presenting an alibi that he and co-accused Lito Cruz were on duty at the municipal building due to a security alert at the time of the shooting. This alibi was corroborated by the Chief of Police and the Mayor. The trial court convicted Abitona of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder but acquitted Cruz due to insufficient evidence. Abitona appealed, arguing his conviction was inconsistent with his co-accused’s acquittal and challenging the credibility of the young eyewitness.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant Alex Abitona based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction but upheld the trial court’s factual findings and the credibility of the eyewitness, Arcie Dagacay. The Court held that the acquittal of co-accused Lito Cruz did not mandate Abitona’s acquittal. The evidence against each accused is evaluated separately. The positive identification by Arcie, who had prior knowledge of Abitona and saw him clearly under well-lit conditions and moonlight, was deemed credible and sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court emphasized that the testimony of a child witness is not inherently unreliable, and the delay in reporting did not impair credibility given the witness’s age and the circumstances of police inaction.
However, the Court modified the crimes from Murder and Frustrated Murder to Homicide and Frustrated Homicide. While the attack was attended by treachery, nighttime, and superior strength, the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not specifically alleged in the informations, thus it could only be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance. The crime committed against Arsenito Dagacay was therefore Homicide, aggravated by treachery and dwelling. The crimes against the children were accordingly downgraded to Frustrated Homicide. The penalties and civil indemnities were adjusted accordingly.