G.R. No. 119306 July 31, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DANTE BELTRAN @ “DUCKTAIL,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Dante Beltran was charged with the murder of Josephine Castro Wisco. The prosecution established that Beltran and the victim, who was married to an overseas worker, were lovers. On the evening of March 16, 1992, they were last seen together drinking with a friend, Josephine Yabut. Yabut testified that the victim confided about her husband’s impending return, leading to a noticeable misunderstanding between the couple. They left together by tricycle. Before midnight, two tricycle drivers, Orlando Meneses and Sisenando Flores, saw Beltran emerging from a cemetery gate, wiping his hands and acting suspiciously. The following morning, the victim’s body with 22 stab wounds was discovered in that cemetery. The victim’s young daughter also testified that Beltran had threatened her mother with a fan knife earlier that day. Beltran fled and was only apprehended almost two years later.
In his defense, Beltran admitted the romantic relationship but claimed it had ended weeks before the incident. He presented an alibi, asserting he was elsewhere at the time of the killing. The trial court rejected his defense, found the circumstantial evidence sufficient, and convicted him of murder qualified by treachery, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused-appellant of the crime of Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from Murder to Homicide. The Court upheld that the totality of the circumstantial evidence—the prior threat, being the last person seen with the victim, his suspicious conduct near the crime scene, and his flight—formed an unbroken chain leading to the moral certainty that Beltran was the perpetrator. However, the Court ruled that the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not proven. The information alleged treachery, but the prosecution failed to present any eyewitness to the actual attack. The mere number of wounds does not, by itself, establish the mode of attack or that the victim was deliberately deprived of any chance to defend herself. The means of execution was not shown with clarity. Consequently, without any qualifying circumstance, the crime is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court also modified the civil liability, ordering an additional P50,000.00 as death indemnity. The penalty was set at an indeterminate sentence of ten years of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen years and four months of reclusion temporal as maximum.