G.R. No. 130637 . August 19, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DAVID ANDALES y MALOBAGO alias “Abie,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

On November 10, 1993, brothers David Andales and Jellie Andales were charged with murder before the RTC of Catarman, Northern Samar, for the killing of Rodolfo Malobago on September 4, 1993. David pleaded not guilty, while Jellie pleaded guilty to homicide, which the trial court did not accept. The prosecution evidence, primarily from the victim’s wife Sonia Malobago and mother-in-law Anacorita de Guia, established that at around 6 a.m., while Rodolfo was tapping “tuba” from a coconut tree and Sonia was nearby, Jellie suddenly appeared and fired several shots at Rodolfo. Rodolfo slid down and, with Sonia, ran towards the highway, pursued by both David and Jellie who continued firing. Rodolfo collapsed, and David then turned him over and hacked him repeatedly with a bolo, delivering a fatal cut to his throat. The motive appeared to be a boundary dispute over land between the Malobago and Andales families. The defense presented alibi for David, claiming he was at his sister’s house repairing beams, and self-defense for Jellie, claiming Rodolfo attacked him with a bolo. The trial court convicted both of homicide, but on appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the conviction to murder qualified by treachery. Since the crime was committed prior to the effectivity of RA 7659, the penalty was reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death. With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, David was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The case was certified to the Supreme Court for review as to David Andales only, as Jellie did not appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly convicted accused-appellant David Andales of murder qualified by treachery.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court sustained the findings of fact of the trial court and the Court of Appeals, giving great weight to the clear, straightforward, and unequivocal testimonies of prosecution witnesses Sonia Malobago and Anacorita de Guia, despite their relationship to the victim. Their testimonies established that the attack was sudden and unexpected, with Jellie firing at Rodolfo while he was defenseless atop a coconut tree, and David mercilessly hacking him after he had fallen. This manner of execution ensured the victim had no opportunity to defend himself, constituting treachery. The Court found no reason to deviate from these factual findings and rejected the defenses of alibi and denial. The penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the Court of Appeals was affirmed.