G.R. No. 107978 November 19, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ANTONIO DANQUE Y DANDO, appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Antonio Danque y Dando and a John Doe were charged with Murder for the killing of Vivencio Lucaban on August 12, 1989, along Maharlika Highway, Barangay New Mahayag, Catbalogan, Samar. The Information alleged treachery, evident premeditation, and abuse of superior strength. Two eyewitnesses testified for the prosecution. Lydia Lucaban, the victim’s wife, saw from about 100 meters away an unidentified person holding her husband’s hands while accused-appellant hacked him. She hid in fear. Monico Bola, gathering firewood across the road, also saw a person holding the victim’s hands while accused-appellant delivered three hacking blows. Both witnesses testified to a prior altercation between the accused and the victim over land owned by Lydia’s aunt. The accused-appellant interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was in Biliran, Leyte, gathering shells on the date of the incident, which was corroborated by Paquito Senogat. The trial court convicted accused-appellant of Murder and sentenced him under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The Court of Appeals affirmed the factual findings but ruled the imposable penalty was reclusion perpetua, certifying the case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The main issues pertain to the credibility of the prosecution witnesses and the proper appreciation of the qualifying circumstances for Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court upheld the credibility of prosecution witnesses Lydia Lucaban and Monico Bola, finding their testimonies positive and categorical. Their reactions (hiding and not immediately reporting) were deemed natural under the circumstances. The defense of alibi was rejected as weak and unreliable, especially when contradicted by positive identification. The Court found that treachery qualified the killing to Murder, as the victim was rendered defenseless by an accomplice holding his hands, ensuring the execution without risk. However, the circumstances of evident premeditation and abuse of superior strength were not proven. Evident premeditation lacked proof of sufficient planning time, and abuse of superior strength was absorbed by treachery. The crime is Murder qualified by treachery. With no mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the penalty is reclusion perpetua. The Court modified the trial court’s decision, imposing reclusion perpetua and affirming the indemnity of P50,000.00 to the heirs of the victim.