G.R. No. 120998. July 26, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DIONEL MEREN y MAIQUE, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Dionel Meren was convicted of murder by the Regional Trial Court of Manila and sentenced to death. The prosecution’s facts established that on May 29, 1994, between 11:00 p.m. and midnight, the victim Jessie Villaresco was asleep inside a parked jeepney with several companions. Accused-appellant suddenly appeared and, without warning, stabbed the sleeping victim multiple times in the abdomen, head, back, and other body parts before fleeing. The victim’s companions witnessed the incident and brought him to the Barangay Captain’s house where he died. Accused-appellant was later arrested and positively identified by witness Gerry Padilla at the police station. An information was filed charging him with murder, qualified by treachery and evident premeditation. After trial, the court convicted him, imposing the death penalty due to the qualifying aggravating circumstance of alevosia and the generic aggravating circumstance of nighttime, and ordered him to indemnify the victim’s heirs.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies and in disregarding the defense of alibi.
2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of murder by finding the presence of the qualifying aggravating circumstance of treachery and the generic aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction for murder but MODIFIED the penalty.
1. The trial court did not err in crediting the prosecution witnesses and rejecting the defense of alibi. The eyewitness testimonies of Gerry Padilla and Edgardo Valderama were credible and consistent, given they were together during the incident. The crime scene was well-lighted by Meralco posts, enabling clear identification of the accused-appellant. The defense of alibi cannot prevail over positive identification and was further weakened by the failure to present corroborating witnesses.
2. The trial court correctly found treachery (alevosia) present. The attack was sudden and unexpected, directed at a victim who was fast asleep and utterly defenseless, ensuring the execution of the crime without risk to the accused-appellant. This mode of attack directly and specially insured the crime’s execution.
However, the trial court erred in considering nighttime as a separate generic aggravating circumstance. First, nighttime was absorbed by treachery. Second, the crime occurred in a well-lighted area, which enabled witness identification and negated nocturnity as an aggravating factor.
Since treachery qualified the killing to murder and no other aggravating circumstance was properly proved, the penalty should be reclusion perpetua, not death. The decision was thus affirmed with the modification reducing the penalty to reclusion perpetua.