G.R. No. 121792 October 7, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSE CHUA y VALENCIA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging Jose Chua y Valencia with Murder for the killing of Pepito Lopez y Santos on December 15, 1989, in Manila, allegedly committed with treachery and evident premeditation. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented Fernando Sanchez, who testified that around 7:00 p.m., he was sent to his uncle Pepito Lopez to ask for money. Upon arrival, he saw his uncle and the accused in a fighting stance. The accused stabbed the victim four times while the victim was lying down after slipping on wet vegetables. While the accused was stabbing, a companion of the accused shot the victim twice, and another companion clubbed him. The place was a market and was lighted. Fernando was about ten feet away, was frightened and shocked, but did not ask for help. He gave a statement to the police five months later out of fear. Dr. Florante Baltazar conducted the post-mortem and testified the victim sustained fatal gunshot wounds from a .38 caliber firearm, a hacking wound, a stab wound, and an incise wound, indicating more than one assailant. The defense presented accused Jose Chua, who testified that the victim approached him with a bulging waistline, challenged him, and chased him with a bladed weapon while he was unarmed. He claimed he slipped, and when he stood up, he heard shots, and someone shot the victim. He denied stabbing or shooting the victim and left after the incident. Defense witness Jaime Camacho, the Barangay Chairman, testified he saw the accused and the victim quarrel, which he pacified. Later, he heard shouting, turned, and saw the victim lying prostrate and the accused standing about two meters away holding a bladed weapon about 30 cm long. He did not hear any gunshots and saw no other person with a bladed weapon near the victim. The accused admitted during trial that he had previous criminal convictions. The Regional Trial Court convicted the accused of Murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, plus damages. The accused appealed, arguing the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court gravely erred in finding accused-appellant Jose Chua y Valencia guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. It held that the prosecution proved the accused’s guilt for Homicide, not Murder, beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found the testimony of prosecution eyewitness Fernando Sanchez credible, straightforward, and consistent, and it prevailed over the accused’s bare denial. The Court agreed with the trial court’s assessment of Sanchez’s credibility. However, the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation alleged in the information were not proven. Treachery was not established because the initial attack was not shown to be sudden and from behind; the evidence indicated a face-to-face altercation that escalated. Evident premeditation was not proven as there was no evidence of planning or preparation. The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present, as the accused, together with two armed companions, took advantage of their combined strength to overpower the unarmed victim. The crime committed was Homicide, qualified by abuse of superior strength. The penalty was imposed in its maximum period due to this aggravating circumstance. The Supreme Court sentenced the accused to an indeterminate penalty of ten years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to twenty years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity to the heirs was reduced to P50,000.00, and exemplary damages were set at P30,000.00. The award of moral damages was deleted for lack of basis.