G.R. No. 158362, April 4, 2011
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GILBERTO VILLARICO, SR. @ “BERTING”, GILBERTO VILLARICO, JR., JERRY RAMENTOS, and RICKY VILLARICO, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

On August 8, 1999, at around 7:50 p.m., Haide Cagatan was preparing dinner in the kitchen of his family’s residence in Bolinsong, Bonifacio, Misamis Occidental. The kitchen wall had bamboo slats with gaps. His sister-in-law, Remedios Cagatan, saw all four accused positioned outside the kitchen door aiming firearms: Ricky Villarico on the left with Gilberto, Jr. behind him, and Gilberto, Sr. on the right with Jerry Ramentos behind him. When Gilberto, Jr. noticed Remedios, he pointed his gun at her, causing her to drop to the ground and shout a warning. Remedios then heard three gunshots. Francisco Cagatan, Haide’s father, also heard the shots and, from a hole he jumped into, saw and recognized Gilberto, Sr., Gilberto, Jr., and Ricky standing by the kitchen door aiming their guns upward before leaving with Ramentos. Haide, wounded, approached his mother Lolita and said, “Tabang kay gipusil ko ni Berting” (Help, I was shot by Berting). He was brought to a clinic but died from hypovolemic shock due to gunshot wounds on his left scapular region (back) and right elbow.
The accused denied involvement and presented alibis: Gilberto, Sr. claimed he was sick at home; Gilberto, Jr. claimed he was visiting his girlfriend and later attended a wake; Ricky claimed he was at his aunt’s house; and Ramentos claimed he was drinking at a store. The defense also presented Peter Ponggos, who testified that when he helped bring Haide to the hospital, Haide said there was only one assailant whom he did not recognize.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted all accused of homicide, aggravated by dwelling, but found treachery not proven. The Court of Appeals (CA) modified the conviction to murder, finding treachery present, and imposed reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

1. Whether the prosecution proved the identity of the assailants and the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the qualifying circumstance of treachery attended the killing.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the CA decision with modifications to the civil liability.
1. On Identity and Guilt: The Court upheld the positive identification of the accused by prosecution witnesses Remedios and Francisco Cagatan. Their testimonies were clear, consistent, and credible. The defense of alibi was rejected as the accused failed to prove it was physically impossible for them to be at the crime scene, given the short distances (100 to 700 meters) between their alleged locations and the victim’s house. The testimony of defense witness Peter Ponggos was deemed unreliable and could not overcome the positive identification.
2. On Treachery: The Court found treachery (alevosia) present. The attack was sudden and unexpected, ensuring the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. The accused positioned themselves outside the kitchen at night, using the holes in the bamboo wall to see Haide, who was preoccupied with cooking and unaware of the impending assault. The fact that the fatal shot entered from the back (left scapular region) confirmed the attack was from behind, without any provocation or opportunity for Haide to retaliate. The Court clarified that treachery does not require the victim to be facing the assailants; the essence is the deliberate adoption of means to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant.
Dispositive Portion: The accused were found guilty of murder qualified by treachery. Each was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. They were ordered to pay the heirs of Haide Cagatan Php 75,000 as civil indemnity, Php 75,000 as moral damages, Php 30,000 as exemplary damages, and Php 25,000 as temperate damages, plus interest at 6% per annum from finality of judgment until fully paid.