G.R. No. 126143 June 10, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFONSO BADON, ARNOLD ARELLANO and NILO CAFINO, accused. ALFONSO BADON and ARNOLD ARELLANO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The accused, Alfonso Badon, Arnold Arellano, and Nilo Cafino (at large), were charged with Murder for the killing of Edwin Gomez on June 17, 1983. The prosecution evidence established that the victim, after being initially shot by Restituto Arellano, sought help and was being transported via pedicab to a hospital. At that moment, appellants Badon and Arellano, together with Cafino, arrived. Badon stabbed Gomez, after which Arellano and Cafino shot him. As Gomez lay prostrate, Badon and Arellano took turns hacking him, inflicting a total of twenty wounds. Prosecution witnesses Demetrio Macayan and Crispin Encontad positively identified the appellants as the perpetrators. The appellants denied involvement, claiming they were elsewhere during the incident and that the killing was done by Restituto Arellano in self-defense after Gomez allegedly attacked him.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of accused-appellants Alfonso Badon and Arnold Arellano for the crime of Murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and if the qualifying circumstance of treachery or abuse of superior strength was present.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the legal basis for the qualifying circumstance. The Court found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses credible and consistent, establishing the appellants’ participation in the concerted attack. The defense of alibi was rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated. The Court, however, disagreed with the trial court’s finding of treachery. The initial shooting by Restituto may have been sudden, but the subsequent fatal attack by the appellants occurred when the victim, though wounded, was still able to disembark from the pedicab and was aware of the assault, negating the element of surprise essential to treachery. Nevertheless, the crime was qualified by the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength. The appellants, together with their co-accused, all armed with bolos and guns, collectively attacked the unarmed and already wounded victim, who was rendered defenseless against their combined force. This clearly constituted abuse of superiority. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was upheld. The civil indemnity was set at P50,000.00, with actual damages for burial expenses and attorney’s fees awarded. Exemplary damages of P20,000.00 were additionally imposed due to the presence of the aggravating circumstance.