G.R. Nos. 131022, 146048 & 146049; December 14, 2000
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROGER ANIVADO and GEORGE CARDENAS, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On May 7, 1996, at the Arwas cockpit in Bani, Pangasinan, Restituto Acenas was shot and killed. Eyewitness Eddie Catabay testified that he saw a long-haired gunman fire a single shot from the cockpit’s second floor, felling Acenas. Catabay then saw accused-appellant George Cardenas signal to the gunman, and the two fled on a motorcycle towards the Poblacion. Catabay later identified the gunman as accused-appellant Roger Anivado. Following a chase, police officers SPO2 Henry Camba and SPO1 Julio Calixtro Jr. apprehended Anivado and Cardenas after a motorcycle accident. Recovered from Anivado was a Colt .45 pistol, and from Cardenas, a .357 revolver. Ballistics tests confirmed the slug and shell found at the crime scene were fired from Anivado’s pistol.
The prosecution charged Anivado and Cardenas with Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and with separate counts of Aggravated Illegal Possession of Firearm under P.D. 1866. The defense presented alibis and claimed the firearms were planted. The Regional Trial Court convicted both accused-appellants of Murder and the respective illegal possession charges, imposing the death penalty for Murder and penalties under P.D. 1866, leading to an automatic review by the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The principal issues were: (1) whether the prosecution proved the guilt of Anivado and Cardenas for Murder beyond reasonable doubt; (2) whether the aggravating circumstance of use of an unlicensed firearm can be appreciated in the Murder case; and (3) the propriety of the penalties imposed.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions for Murder but modified the penalties and the treatment of the firearm charges. The Court found the positive identification by eyewitness Eddie Catabay credible and sufficient to establish conspiracy between Anivado, as the triggerman, and Cardenas, who provided assistance by signaling the escape. The defense of alibi was properly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was present as the attack was sudden and from an elevated position, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself.
Regarding the firearm charges, the Court applied the doctrine from People vs. Molina ( G.R. No. 115835 , July 22, 1998) and subsequent jurisprudence, which holds that when an unlicensed firearm is used in committing Murder or Homicide, the accused can only be convicted for the special complex crime of Murder or Homicide under the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 8294. The separate conviction for illegal possession under P.D. 1866 is absorbed. Consequently, the Court set aside the separate convictions for Aggravated Illegal Possession of Firearm. The death penalty for Murder was reduced to reclusion perpetua in line with the prevailing prohibition on the death penalty at the time of the decision. The Court awarded civil indemnity, moral damages, and actual damages to the victim’s heirs, but disallowed the claim for loss of earning capacity for lack of sufficient evidentiary basis.