G.R. No. L-29190. October 29, 1971.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FELICIANO GUBA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Feliciano Guba, a policeman, was charged with murder alongside Municipal Judge Federico U. Cruz for the killing of detention prisoner Jose Fernandez. The prosecution evidence established that Fernandez was detained on March 3, 1965, for an alleged public scandal. In the early dawn of March 4, appellant Guba, while off-duty, awakened Fernandez in his cell, pretending to help him post bail. Guba led Fernandez out of the jail. About thirty minutes later, inmates heard a gunshot. Fernandez was later found dead from a gunshot wound that entered his back. Judge Cruz, originally co-accused, was dropped from the case after a reinvestigation by the Provincial Fiscal citing the appearance of only one witness and the widow’s “lack of interest.”
At trial, Guba admitted the killing but claimed it was in self-defense. He testified that after taking Fernandez out to discuss bail, Fernandez suddenly attacked him with a stone, prompting him to fire his carbine in response. The trial court rejected this defense, finding the evidence of a treacherous attack more credible, and convicted Guba of murder qualified by treachery.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted appellant Guba of the crime of murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction from murder to homicide. The legal logic hinges on the rules governing allegations in the information and the proper appreciation of aggravating circumstances. While the evidence, particularly the location of the gunshot wound at the victim’s back, sufficiently established the manner of attack (alevosia or treachery), this circumstance was not alleged in the information charging the accused. Under settled jurisprudence, alevosia, even if proven during trial, cannot qualify the killing to murder if it is not specifically pleaded in the information. To hold otherwise would violate the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
Consequently, the killing is homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, punishable by reclusion temporal. The proven treachery is considered only as a generic aggravating circumstance. However, this aggravating circumstance is offset by the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, as appellant voluntarily admitted the killing to the Chief of Police shortly after its commission. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity was increased to P12,000.00. The Court also ordered a copy of the decision forwarded to the Secretary of Justice for an inquiry into the possible responsibility of Judge Federico U. Cruz.