GR 66645; (March, 1989) (Digest)
G.R. No. 66645 March 29, 1989
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RUBEN BACHO @ RUBEN PADOLLA, RAYMUNDO HORCA @ MUNDO, EDUARDO PARAGATO @ DAYDO, and ROGELIO MUNCADA @ NGOLA defendants: RUBEN BACHO @ RUBEN PADOLLA and EDUARDO PARAGATO @ DAYDO, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
The accused-appellants, Ruben Bacho and Eduardo Paragato, along with others, were charged with Murder for the killing of Felipe Openiano, Jr. on April 16, 1981, in Catarman, Northern Samar. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Melchor Mora, testified that he saw the appellants and their companions “ganging up” on and boxing the unarmed victim. He specifically saw Ruben Bacho stab Openiano at the back, causing him to fall. The group, which included five individuals armed with a bolo, an iron pipe, and stones, fled upon the arrival of a bystander with a flashlight. The victim died while being taken to the hospital. The autopsy revealed multiple injuries, including three stab wounds.
The appellants presented alibis. Bacho claimed he was himself attacked and stabbed by an unknown assailant that night. Paragato asserted he was asleep during the incident. The trial court convicted them of Murder qualified by treachery and abuse of superior strength and initially imposed the death penalty. Upon automatic review and with the commutation of the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution, the case proceeded as an appeal for the surviving appellants, Bacho and Paragato.
ISSUE
Whether the accused-appellants are guilty of Murder, and if so, what is the proper penalty and civil liability?
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the penalty and indemnity. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the eyewitness testimony as credible and rejected the appellants’ defenses as unsubstantiated. However, it disagreed with the qualifying circumstance of treachery. The evidence showed the attack commenced with a sudden fist blow, but the mode of attack was not shown to have been deliberately adopted to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the assailants. The fatal stab wound was inflicted only after the initial assault.
Nevertheless, the crime was properly qualified as Murder by abuse of superior strength. The appellants, together with their cohorts, consciously took advantage of their combined strength—numbering five, some armed with deadly weapons—to overpower the solitary, unarmed victim. This circumstance qualifies the killing as Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. With no mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua in its medium period. The civil indemnity was increased to P30,000.00, to be paid jointly and severally by appellants Bacho and Paragato.