G.R. No. 104630; February 20, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALEJANDRO OCSIMAR y ALIGNO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the eyewitness account of Franklin Villamor. He testified that on November 8, 1991, in Iligan City, he saw appellant Alejandro Ocsimar stab the victim, Apolinario Lato, from behind while Lato was seated inside a parked jeepney. Villamor stated the victim was unaware of the impending attack. Ocsimar was subsequently apprehended with a blood-stained hunting knife. The Regional Trial Court convicted Ocsimar of Murder, qualified by treachery, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
For the defense, Ocsimar claimed self-defense. He testified that on the same evening, the drunk victim mauled and choked him inside the jeepney. Alleging a prior altercation and a threat from the victim earlier that day, Ocsimar stated he stabbed Lato only when he was nearly pushed off the vehicle, using a knife he carried for his flower-vending business. He denied any premeditated intent to kill.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellant of Murder, qualified by treachery, or if the crime committed was only Homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction from Murder to Homicide. The Court reiterated that treachery, as a qualifying circumstance, must be proven as clearly as the killing itself. While the prosecution witness saw the appellant stab the victim from behind, this single perspective did not conclusively establish treachery. The witness did not see the commencement of the assault, and the evidence was insufficient to rule out the possibility of a sudden altercation as claimed by the defense. Treachery requires proof that the mode of attack was deliberately adopted to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. Any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
The Court also rejected the claim of self-defense. An accused invoking self-defense must prove it by clear and convincing evidence. Ocsimar’s uncorroborated testimony, coupled with his flight from the scene, failed to meet this burden. Consequently, he is liable for the felonious killing. However, absent the qualifying circumstance of treachery, the crime is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years of prision mayor minimum, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months, and one (1) day of reclusion temporal medium, as maximum, and upheld the civil indemnity of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).