GR 100915; (May, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 100915 . May 31, 1995. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSEPH SUPREMO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The Regional Trial Court convicted Joseph Supremo of murder for the fatal stabbing of Donald “Dodie” Funtecha. Prosecution witness Raymundo Billanes, Jr. testified that on October 3, 1988, at a sing-along bar, the accused, who was seated beside the victim, suddenly declared, “I will kill you,” and immediately stabbed Funtecha in the abdomen. Billanes intervened to prevent a second stab.
The accused, abandoning an initial defense of alibi, claimed self-defense. He testified that the victim, after being refused a stick of marijuana, demanded beer. When the accused complied, the victim and around five companions allegedly ganged up on him, hitting him and banging his head against a wall. Claiming he thought he was dying, Supremo stated he instinctively pulled out a knife and struck the victim.
ISSUE
The core issues are: (1) whether the accused acted in self-defense, and (2) whether the killing was attended by treachery to qualify it as murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from murder to homicide. On the claim of self-defense, the Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility. The evaluation of a trial court on the demeanor of witnesses is accorded great respect and is conclusive barring arbitrariness. The trial court found the testimony of prosecution witness Billanes credible and the accused’s narrative of being ganged up by a large group as incredible. Since self-defense requires unlawful aggression by the victim as an indispensable element, and the prosecution evidence established that the victim initiated no aggression, the plea of self-defense must fail.
Regarding treachery, the Court found the evidence insufficient. While the attack was sudden, treachery requires proof that the assailant consciously and deliberately adopted such means to ensure the execution of the crime without risk. Mere suddenness of attack does not automatically constitute treachery. The prosecution failed to prove this deliberate mode of attack. Consequently, the killing constitutes homicide, not murder. The penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence, and civil indemnity was increased to P50,000.00.