GR 195525; (February, 2014) (Digest)
G.R. No. 195525 ; February 5, 2014
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. WILFREDO GUNDA alias FRED, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
On May 25, 1997, Eladio Globio, Sr. and his son, Eladio Jr., were walking along a trail in Balangkayan, Eastern Samar. Eladio Jr., who was about ten meters ahead, witnessed his father being waylaid by accused-appellant Wilfredo Gunda and unidentified companions. The companions held the victim’s arms while Gunda stabbed him multiple times. Eladio Jr. fled and was pursued but escaped. Another eyewitness, Teofilo Ambal, Jr., also saw the incident from his farm, corroborating that Gunda first struck the victim with a wooden pole before stabbing him with a bolo. The victim’s body was recovered, and a post-mortem examination confirmed death from multiple stab wounds. Gunda was charged with Murder.
At trial, Gunda denied the charge and proffered an alibi, claiming he was in a different barangay gathering rattan at the time. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder qualified by treachery and conspiracy, and imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua, holding that treachery, as a qualifying circumstance, could not be simultaneously used as a generic aggravating circumstance to justify the death penalty.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction for Murder and modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the CA decision with modifications to the damages. The Court upheld the conviction, finding the testimonies of eyewitnesses Eladio Jr. and Ambal credible, consistent, and corroborated by physical evidence. Their positive identification of Gunda as the perpetrator prevailed over his weak alibi, which failed to prove the physical impossibility of his presence at the crime scene. The Court agreed that treachery attended the killing, as the attack was sudden and from behind, rendering the unarmed victim defenseless and ensuring the execution without risk to the assailants. Conspiracy was also evident from the concerted actions of Gunda and his companions.
Regarding the penalty, the Supreme Court affirmed the CA’s imposition of reclusion perpetua. It clarified that treachery, being a qualifying circumstance that raised the killing to Murder, could not be reused as a generic aggravating circumstance to warrant the death penalty under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. With no other aggravating circumstances present, the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua. The Court further modified the award of damages, increasing civil indemnity and moral damages, and awarding exemplary damages and temperate damages, all with legal interest.