G.R. No. 206970, July 29, 2015.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ANTONIO EDAÑO and NESTOR EDAÑO, Accused, ANTONIO EDAÑO, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Antonio Edaño and his co-accused Nestor Edaño were charged with Murder for the killing of Leonardo Dabalos on March 21, 1999, in Leyte, Leyte. The Information alleged they conspired, attacked, and stabbed the victim with a knife, inflicting multiple fatal wounds. Nestor was arrested and convicted in 2001. Antonio remained at large until his arrest in 2005. During his trial, the prosecution presented four witnesses and adopted the testimonies and exhibits from Nestor’s case, as the eyewitness Fernando Layson and the victim’s son Monico Dabalos were already deceased. Fernando’s testimony, given in the prior trial, stated that at around 6:30 p.m., while on his way home, he heard moaning, hid behind plants, and saw Antonio stabbing Leonardo while Nestor held the victim’s arms. He saw Antonio stab the victim at least three times with a short bladed weapon. He did not intervene out of fear, went to his brother’s house, and reported the incident the next day to the police and the victim’s family. The defense interposed denial and alibi, claiming Antonio was residing in Babatngon, Leyte, at the time and had a prior misunderstanding with Fernando. The Regional Trial Court found Antonio guilty of Murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Antonio appealed, challenging the credibility of Fernando’s testimony, the sufficiency of identification given the darkness, Fernando’s failure to help or immediately report, alleged ill motive, inconsistency between the number of stabs witnessed and wounds found, and the absence of proof of treachery.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming accused-appellant Antonio Edaño’s conviction for Murder based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the conviction with modifications. The Court held that the adoption of the deceased witnesses’ testimonies from the prior trial against Nestor was proper under Section 47, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, as the parties and subject matter were the same and the adverse party had the opportunity for cross-examination. The testimony of lone eyewitness Fernando Layson was found credible, straightforward, and consistent with his sworn statement. His positive identification of the accused was reliable as he knew them well as neighbors and the moon provided sufficient illumination at 6:30 p.m. His failure to intervene or immediately report did not impair his credibility, as there is no standard behavioral response to a startling event, and he acted out of fear and reported the crime the following morning. The alleged ill motive was unsubstantiated. The discrepancy between the number of stabs witnessed (three) and wounds found (seven) did not discredit his testimony, as he stated he saw “many” stabs and witnessing every single blow was not required. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was present because the attack was sudden, from behind, and rendered the victim defenseless as he was held by Nestor while Antonio stabbed him. The Court modified the damages awarded, sentencing accused-appellant to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and ordering him to pay the heirs of the victim ₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity, ₱75,000.00 as moral damages, ₱30,000.00 as exemplary damages, and ₱25,000.00 as temperate damages, all with interest at 6% per annum from finality until fully paid.