G.R. No. 245922 , January 25, 2021.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. DANILO TORO Y DIANO @ “OTO”, APPELLANT.

FACTS

Appellant Danilo Toro y Diano @ “Oto” was charged with Murder for the death of Pascualito Espiña, Sr. The Information alleged that on or about March 21, 2004, in Sitio Pinana-an, Barangay Calantiao, Bobon, Northern Samar, appellant and Salvador Cahusay, conspiring and mutually helping each other, armed with a short bolo, with treachery and evident premeditation, attacked, assaulted, and stabbed Pascualito Espiña, Sr., inflicting mortal wounds causing his death. Appellant pleaded not guilty, while Cahusay remained at large.
The prosecution presented Dr. Henry Novales, who conducted the postmortem examination and found Espiña, Sr. suffered 33 stab wounds, ten of which were fatal. The victim’s son, Pascualito Espiña, Jr., then 16 years old, testified that on March 21, 2004, Cahusay invited his father to a drinking spree at their house. Later, appellant invited them to continue drinking at his house. Around midnight, Espiña, Jr. went to fetch his father. At appellant’s house, he saw his father being held by Cahusay by the arms while appellant stabbed him. The area was illuminated by a gas torch (“sirilya”), and Espiña, Jr. was about two arms length away. Out of fear, he ran to seek help from a barangay tanod but was refused, so he proceeded to his aunt’s house. The following day, the victim’s body was found in appellant’s house. The victim’s brother, Paquito Espiña, corroborated this testimony.
The defense presented appellant, who testified that Espiña, Sr. and Cahusay came to his house for a drinking session, left after two hours when the tuba ran out, and he and his family went to sleep. The next morning, his wife discovered Espiña, Sr.’s lifeless body at the suy-ab (extension of the house). Afraid, they left for another barangay.
The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of Murder, qualified by treachery, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, also finding evident premeditation, and increased the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages.

ISSUE

1. Whether the prosecution sufficiently alleged and proved the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
2. Whether the lone eyewitness, Espiña, Jr., positively identified appellant as the assailant.
3. Whether Espiña, Jr.’s reaction after witnessing the incident was contrary to human experience, affecting his credibility.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the basis of the qualifying circumstance and the awarded damages.
1. On the Sufficiency of the Allegation and Proof of Treachery: The Court held that the Information sufficiently alleged treachery by stating the accused attacked the victim “with treachery” and describing the victim was stabbed while being held by Cahusay, rendering him defenseless. However, the Court found that treachery was not sufficiently proven. The prosecution did not establish how the attack commenced. The eyewitness only saw the victim already being held and stabbed; the inception of the assault was not described, so it could not be determined if the means of execution were deliberately adopted to ensure the attack without risk to the assailant. Therefore, treachery cannot be appreciated.
2. On the Positive Identification and Credibility of the Eyewitness: The Court upheld the positive identification of appellant by Espiña, Jr. The area was illuminated by a gas torch, and Espiña, Jr. was only two arms length away, providing a clear view. His testimony was clear, straightforward, and categorical. His reaction—seeking help from a barangay tanod and, when refused, going to his aunt—does not undermine his credibility. There is no standard form of human behavioral response in startling situations, and he had no ill motive to falsely accuse appellant.
3. On the Qualifying Circumstance and Conviction: Although treachery was not proven, the Court found that the killing was qualified by abuse of superior strength. This was evident from the circumstances: Cahusay held the victim by the arms, rendering him helpless, while appellant inflicted 33 stab wounds. The concerted action of two armed assailants against a single, restrained victim constituted abuse of superior strength. This circumstance was alleged in the Information under the phrase “taking advantage of superior strength,” and was proven during trial. Thus, the killing constitutes Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code.
4. On Damages: The Court modified the awards in line with prevailing jurisprudence. Appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of Pascualito Espiña, Sr. the following: (a) Civil Indemnity of P75,000.00; (b) Moral Damages of P75,000.00; and (c) Exemplary Damages of P75,000.00. All monetary awards shall earn legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Decision until fully paid.
The Court affirmed appellant’s conviction for Murder, qualified by abuse of superior strength, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.