G.R. No. 132079; April 12, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TONY ADOC, DANNY ADOC and EDDIE ADOC, accused, DANNY ADOC and EDDIE ADOC, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On November 5, 1995, at the Ceres bus terminal in Kalibo, Aklan, Ricky Deslate was fatally attacked. Prosecution witnesses Regie and Diomedel Diapo testified that accused-appellants Danny Adoc and Eddie Adoc, along with their brother Tony (at-large), assaulted the victim. They stated that Danny and Tony held Ricky’s arms while Eddie struck him from behind with a wooden stool. After Ricky fell, Danny also hit him in the face with a stool. Diomedel further testified he saw Tony stab the victim. The autopsy revealed the cause of death was a stab wound to the chest that penetrated the heart, along with other injuries from blunt force trauma. The accused-appellants fled after the incident.
The defense, led by Eddie Adoc, claimed self-defense. Eddie testified that Ricky and two other armed men approached their group, uttered a challenge, and then boxed him. Fearing Ricky was about to stab him, Eddie claimed he picked up a stool and hit Ricky in self-defense. Danny Adoc denied participation, alleging he was merely trying to pacify the individuals involved. The trial court rejected these defenses, convicted Danny and Eddie of murder qualified by treachery, and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of accused-appellants Danny Adoc and Eddie Adoc for the crime of murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from Murder to Homicide. The Court found the prosecution witnesses credible and their testimonies consistent on the material points of the attack. The medical evidence corroborated their account of blunt force injuries. However, the Court ruled that treachery (alevosia) was not sufficiently established. For treachery to qualify a killing as murder, the prosecution must prove that the assailant employed means of execution that deliberately and consciously ensured the victim’s defenselessness. The evidence showed the attack began with a sudden blow from behind while the victim was restrained, which initially suggests treachery. Yet, the Court held that the factual milieu—an altercation in a public terminal—did not conclusively demonstrate that the mode of attack was deliberately adopted to eliminate any risk to the appellants from the victim’s retaliation. Absent clear proof of this deliberate choice, the qualifying circumstance of treachery cannot be appreciated.
Consequently, without any qualifying circumstance, the crime committed is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court sentenced each appellant to an indeterminate penalty of eight years and one day of prision mayor medium as minimum, to fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal medium as maximum. They were also ordered to pay jointly and severally P50,000.00 as civil indemnity to the victim’s heirs.