G.R. No. 218581. March 27, 2019.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. LARRY LUMAHANG Y TALISAY, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

FACTS

Two Informations were filed against accused-appellant Larry Lumahang for the stabbing death of Rodel Velitario (Murder) and the non-fatal stabbing of Augusto Pornelos (Attempted Murder). The prosecution alleged that on December 14, 2008, Lumahang, appearing angry, suddenly attacked Pornelos from behind, stabbing him in the buttocks. He then turned to Velitario and stabbed him repeatedly, causing fatal abdominal wounds. The defense presented a different narrative, claiming Lumahang and his cousin were accosted by a group of intoxicated men, including Pornelos, who molested his cousin. A scuffle ensued where someone pulled a knife, and Lumahang was stabbed in the thigh while grappling for the weapon. He denied stabbing anyone and claimed self-defense.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Lumahang of Murder and Less Serious Physical Injuries. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Murder conviction but modified the other charge to Slight Physical Injuries. Lumahang appealed, arguing the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the qualifying circumstances were not established.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crimes charged, specifically the presence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery for Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court partially granted the appeal. It upheld Lumahang’s criminal liability but modified the crimes and penalties. For the death of Velitario, the Court ruled that the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not proven. The prosecution evidence showed the attack on Velitario occurred immediately after the initial assault on Pornelos, who managed to run away. The Court found that the prosecution failed to establish that the mode of attack was deliberately adopted to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. The suddenness of an attack alone does not constitute treachery; it must be shown that the method was consciously chosen for its safety and efficiency. Absent this proof, the crime is Homicide, not Murder. The penalty was adjusted accordingly.
Regarding the injury to Pornelos, the Court affirmed the CA’s finding of Slight Physical Injuries, as the wound required only seven days of healing. The sentence of twenty days of arresto menor was sustained, with the generic aggravating circumstance of treachery offset by the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. Finally, following People v. Jugueta, the Court awarded the heirs of Velitario P50,000 each as civil indemnity, moral damages, and temperate damages, all with legal interest.