GR 155256; (July, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 155256 ; July 30, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. EDUARDO MEDINA alias “EDDIE BOY FLUID,” appellant.
FACTS
On December 25, 2000, Nelson Caubalejo was shot multiple times in Lipa City, resulting in his death from severe hemorrhage. Appellant Eduardo Medina was charged with murder. The prosecution presented two key witnesses. Henry Aniversario testified that he saw Medina, illuminated by Christmas lights, chase the victim and fire a .45 caliber pistol at him. Nelson’s sister, Nilda, testified that the dying victim, upon staggering home, identified his assailant as “Eddie Boy Fluid” (Medina’s alias) and implicated a certain Gerry Conti as the gun owner.
The defense presented an alibi, with Medina claiming he was drinking in another town at the time of the shooting and only returned home later. He also alleged that prosecution witness Henry Aniversario harbored a grudge against him due to a past quarrel and a drug deal gone wrong. The trial court convicted Medina of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and correctly established the qualifying circumstance of treachery for murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from Murder to Homicide. The Court found the positive identification by eyewitness Henry Aniversario to be credible and sufficient to establish Medina’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Aniversario’s account was clear, consistent, and given under conditions of adequate illumination. The dying declaration of the victim, as testified to by his sister, corroborated this identification. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over this positive identification, and the alleged motive of the witness was insufficient to discredit his testimony.
However, the Court ruled that treachery was not proven. The prosecution evidence showed that the attack commenced when the victim stepped outside to urinate. There was no showing that the appellant employed means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime which deliberately and consciously ensured its execution without risk to himself from any defense the victim might make. The qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation was also not alleged in the Information. Thus, the crime is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Medina was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal medium as maximum. He was also ordered to pay P48,175 in actual damages and P50,000 as civil indemnity to the victim’s heirs.