GR 139528; (May, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 139528 ; May 9, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NORMAN OBORDO y BULALAKAW, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On January 23, 1997, in Barangay Antipolo, Dapitan City, the victim Homer Jamarolin and his companions, including Edgar Bendillo, were on their way to a benefit dance when they encountered the group of accused-appellant Norman Obordo. A separate scuffle ensued between Bendillo and another individual, Ronald Alap-ap. During this commotion, accused-appellant called Homer and asked him to light his cigarette. Homer obliged, extending his own lighted cigarette.
As Homer was lighting the cigarette, accused-appellant, with his right hand concealed at his hip, suddenly stabbed Homer on the left side of his abdomen with a bladed weapon. Homer, caught by surprise while performing the act of lighting the cigarette, retaliated with a punch before accused-appellant fled. The victim was rushed to the hospital but died from the stab wound which injured his stomach and liver. The prosecution witnesses, Bendillo and the victim’s brother Rolando Jamarolin, positively identified accused-appellant, stating the scene was well-illuminated by a fluorescent lamp and moonlight.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted accused-appellant of Murder qualified by treachery.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder. The Court found the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Edgar Bendillo and Rolando Jamarolin credible, consistent, and sufficient to establish accused-appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Their positive identification was reliable as the incident occurred in a well-lighted area. The defense of denial and alibi proffered by accused-appellant was inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive identification.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery (alevosia) was correctly appreciated. The attack was sudden and unexpected, executed in a manner that deprived the victim of any opportunity to defend himself or retaliate. Homer was engaged in the harmless act of lighting a cigarette for accused-appellant, which placed him in a vulnerable position. The mode of attack, employing a concealed weapon and exploiting the victim’s preoccupation, ensured the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. Evident premeditation was not proven. The Court modified the awarded damages, increasing civil indemnity and moral damages to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) each in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.