G.R. No. 104729 February 3, 1994
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VALTONY JAVIER Y JAVELOSA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Valtony Javier y Javelosa was charged with Murder for the killing of Eric Abante y Castro. The prosecution’s case, established mainly through eyewitness Rolando Dadua, was that on the evening of December 3, 1990, at the Navotas Fishery Port, a commotion occurred involving Reynaldo Garcia and Dennis Garcia. After the commotion, accused-appellant, along with Ponciano Enderina who identified himself as a fish port policeman, arrived. Accused-appellant struck Dadua with a gun and, together with Enderina, mauled both Dadua and Abante. They were then taken to the Port Security Division (PSD) headquarters. At the headquarters, which was well-lighted, accused-appellant approached Abante, who pleaded with his hands up. Accused-appellant poked his gun at Abante’s face, said “I will kill you,” and shot him between the eyes, causing his immediate death. Dadua positively identified accused-appellant as the assailant in a police line-up and in court. Another witness, Bienvenido Cruz, corroborated the shooting incident. The defense presented an alibi, claiming accused-appellant was elsewhere monitoring vessels and only learned later he was being accused. The trial court convicted accused-appellant of Murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The main issues were: (1) whether the prosecution established the guilt of accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt through positive identification; and (2) whether the killing was qualified by treachery to constitute Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the damages. The Court held that the guilt of accused-appellant was established beyond reasonable doubt. The positive identification by eyewitness Rolando Dadua was clear, convincing, and consistent. Dadua had ample opportunity to observe accused-appellant at close range from the mauling until the shooting. The Court found no reason to disturb the trial court’s assessment of Dadua’s credibility. The killing was qualified by treachery because the victim was weak, defenseless, unarmed, and in a state of surrender with his hands raised when he was shot at close range, depriving him of any chance to defend himself. The penalty for Murder is reclusion temporal maximum to death; with no mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. The Court modified the award of damages: civil indemnity of P50,000.00 was sustained; moral damages of P50,000.00 were affirmed; actual damages for burial expenses were reduced to P35,800.00; and the award for attorney’s fees was deleted.