GR 137494; (October, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 137494-95; October 25, 2001
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SOTERO REYES alias “TURING”, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Sotero Reyes was charged with Murder and Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition for the killing of Nicasio Atienza on August 19, 1996. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Roman Dalisay, testified that while he and the victim were walking single file on a narrow path, they encountered Reyes, who was carrying a carbine rifle. Reyes ordered Dalisay to drop to the ground. When the victim released Dalisay, who then complied, Reyes shot the victim. Dalisay heard multiple gunshots thereafter. The postmortem examination revealed multiple gunshot wounds, and a police certification confirmed Reyes had no license for the firearm.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Reyes of Murder qualified by treachery and Illegal Possession of Firearms, sentencing him to death for Murder and an imprisonment term for the firearms violation. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the crime of Murder with the qualifying circumstance of treachery beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the conviction from Murder to Homicide. The Court held that treachery was not sufficiently established. The prosecution evidence showed the attack was frontal, and the eyewitness account did not detail the precise manner of the assault to prove that the means of execution were deliberately adopted to ensure the victim’s defenselessness. The mere suddenness of an attack is insufficient to constitute treachery; it must be shown that the method was consciously chosen to eliminate any risk to the assailant. Here, the victim was face-to-face with the accused and was even using Dalisay as a shield initially, indicating a possibility of defense. Thus, the killing was homicide, not murder. The Court applied the indeterminate sentence law, sentencing Reyes to an indeterminate penalty of twelve years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twenty years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The illegal possession of firearm charge was absorbed as an aggravating circumstance in the homicide. The Court also awarded civil indemnity, temperate, moral, and exemplary damages to the victim’s heirs.