G.R. No. 82769 September 6, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EUGENIO JAVAR Y PABLO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On May 20, 1984, at about 8:30 PM, Rodolfo Arpon, Reynaldo Balberan, and Danilo Garcia were conversing in front of St. Joseph Chapel in Manila. Teodoro “Teody” Garcia confronted Balberan, leading to a heated argument. After Teodoro left, he talked to his friend, the accused Eugenio Javar, who was nearby. Javar approached the group and asked who their enemy was. Upon being told it was “Teody,” Javar, without warning, pulled out an 8-inch knife, aimed it at Arpon and Garcia (causing them to flee), then turned to Balberan, grabbed him by the shoulder, and stabbed him below the navel. Balberan was rushed to the hospital but died on arrival. Javar was later arrested and gave a sworn statement admitting the killing. At trial, Javar denied the crime, claiming he was asleep, was awakened by a commotion, and merely witnessed a fight. He alleged his extrajudicial confession was coerced through maltreatment. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the prosecution witnesses and disregarding the defense evidence.
2. Whether the trial court erred in giving probative value to the accused’s sworn statement taken allegedly in violation of his constitutional rights.
3. Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
4. Whether the crime committed was murder or homicide, specifically regarding the presence of treachery.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction with modifications.
1. The trial court’s findings on witness credibility are accorded the highest respect, as it is in a better position to observe the witnesses. The Court found no improper motive for the prosecution witness to give perjured testimony.
2. The extrajudicial confession (Sinumpaang Salaysay) of the accused was inadmissible in evidence because it was obtained without the assistance of counsel, in violation of Section 12, Article III of the 1987 Constitution . Any waiver of the right to counsel must be made with the assistance of counsel.
3. The accused’s guilt was nevertheless established beyond reasonable doubt by independent evidence, specifically the positive eyewitness testimony of Rodolfo Arpon, who identified Javar as the assailant. Motive becomes immaterial once the assailant is positively identified.
4. The crime is Murder qualified by treachery. The accused employed means to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to himself. He pretended to aim his knife at the victim’s companions first, lulling the unarmed victim into a false sense of security before suddenly stabbing him. A frontal attack can be treacherous when it is sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed. The accused’s flight after the incident was a tacit admission of guilt.
The penalty was modified from life imprisonment to reclusion perpetua, and the death indemnity was increased to P50,000.00.