G.R. No. 123073 June 19, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENJAMIN CAYABYAB y BAGAYAN alias BENJIE CAYABYAB, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Benjamin Cayabyab was charged with Murder for the death of Rommel Torio on February 7, 1994, in Dagupan City. The prosecution’s evidence established that the victim and his friends were having a drinking session at a basketball court. The accused passed by, shook hands with the victim, and after a seeming disagreement, left stating he would return. The group dispersed. Witness Richard Rabina later saw the victim urinating beside a fishpond and then saw the accused approach and stab him on the left chest. The victim was rushed to the hospital but was pronounced dead on arrival. The cause of death was a stab wound. The accused interposed self-defense, claiming that as he was leaving after drinking with the group, the victim suddenly collared him from behind and tried to attack him with a knife. A struggle ensued, and the accused was able to get the knife and thrust it at the victim. The trial court rejected the defense, found the killing attended by treachery, and convicted the accused of Murder, imposing the death penalty.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in not giving exculpatory weight to the theory of self-defense.
2. Whether the trial court erred in giving full credence to the testimonies of prosecution witnesses.
3. Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
4. Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

RULING

1. The trial court did not err in rejecting the theory of self-defense. The accused failed to prove with clear and convincing evidence the elements of self-defense, particularly unlawful aggression. His claim of being attacked with a knife and kicked by several companions was not supported by any evidence of injury on his person. His immediate flight and failure to surrender to authorities also militated against his claim.
2. The trial court did not err in crediting the prosecution witnesses. Their testimonies were consistent on the material points: the accused left after a disagreement, returned, and stabbed the victim who was then urinating and in a defenseless position. Minor inconsistencies did not affect their credibility.
3. The trial court erred in appreciating treachery. The prosecution failed to prove how the attack commenced. The evidence did not clearly and cogently establish that the accused employed means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime that ensured its execution without risk to himself from any defense the victim might make. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
4. The trial court erred in appreciating nighttime as an aggravating circumstance. The prosecution did not prove that the accused purposely sought the cover of darkness to facilitate the commission of the crime.
The Supreme Court modified the judgment. The accused is guilty of Homicide, not Murder, due to the prosecution’s failure to prove treachery. The penalty imposed is reclusion temporal. The award of civil indemnity is increased to P50,000.00, and moral damages of P50,000.00 are awarded. The other damages awarded by the trial court are affirmed.