G.R. No. 224222, October 09, 2019
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Dante Galam and Lito Galam, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Dante Galam and Lito Galam were charged with the murder of Eusebio Antolin. The prosecution’s evidence established that on January 15, 2000, around 7:00 PM, the victim’s children, Mario and Mary Jane Antolin, were eating dinner when they heard their father arguing outside. Upon checking with a flashlight, they saw appellants arguing with their father. They heard Lito Galam threaten, “Papatayin ka namin!” and Dante Galam curse, “Putang-ina mo!” They then saw Lito point a gun at Eusebio, who dared him to shoot, after which Lito instantly shot Eusebio in the chest, causing his death. Other witnesses testified about prior threats made by appellants against the victim two days before the incident and about an earlier land dispute. The defense presented an alibi for Dante, claiming he was at his sister’s house during the incident, which was corroborated by his sister and brother-in-law. Lito did not testify. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellants of murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modification to the damages.

ISSUE

Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming appellants’ conviction for murder?

RULING

No, the Court of Appeals did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution proved all elements of murder beyond reasonable doubt. First, the positive and credible identification by eyewitnesses Mario and Mary Jane Antolin, who were at the scene and saw appellants argue with and shoot their father, was given full credence. Their testimonies were straightforward and categorical. Second, the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation were present. Treachery existed because the attack was sudden and unexpected, leaving the unarmed victim with no opportunity to defend himself. Evident premeditation was established by the prior threat made by appellants to kill the victim two days before the shooting, showing their deliberate plan. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over positive identification. Conspiracy was deduced from appellants’ concerted actions before and during the shooting. The Supreme Court modified the penalties and damages, imposing reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and awarding civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages, and temperate damages, all with interest.