G.R. No. L-29016-18 April 5, 1984
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Artemio Bernal, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Artemio Bernal, was charged with two murders and attempted murder. The prosecution evidence established that shortly after midnight on December 9, 1966, a group including Eugenio Satajo and Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr. were walking when they encountered Bernal. After being greeted, Bernal responded with a threat, drew a gun, and fired at Ricarte Monsanto, who ducked and was unhit. When Peñaflor approached with raised hands pleading, “Don’t shoot, friend,” Bernal pushed him and shot him twice, causing fatal wounds. Subsequently, Bernal also shot and killed Captain Satajo. The victims died from their injuries, as certified by the attending physician.
Bernal admitted the killings but interposed self-defense. He claimed he was accosted by a group of six or seven armed men, including Satajo and Monsanto, who announced a holdup and threatened to kill him. He alleged he grabbed a weapon, fired warning shots, and shot Peñaflor and Satajo only when they blocked his path and chased him during his escape. The trial court rejected this defense, convicted him of homicide for Satajo’s death, murder for Peñaflor’s death (qualified by treachery), and attempted murder for firing at Monsanto, imposing corresponding penalties.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court correctly appreciated the qualifying circumstance of treachery in the killing of Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr., and whether the evidence sufficiently proves the crime of attempted murder against Ricarte Monsanto.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision, agreeing with the Solicitor General’s recommendations. On the killing of Peñaflor, the Court held that treachery was not proven. For treachery to exist, the mode of attack must be deliberately adopted to ensure execution without risk to the offender. The meeting between Bernal and the victims was accidental, and there was no evidence of pre-existing ill will or a preconceived plan to kill Peñaflor. The attack, while sudden, was impulsive and triggered by the greetings, not a consciously chosen method to facilitate the killing without risk. Thus, the crime is homicide, not murder.
Regarding the charge of attempted murder for firing at Monsanto, the Court acquitted Bernal. It found serious doubt that Bernal actually aimed and fired at Monsanto with intent to kill. The Court noted the improbability of Monsanto successfully ducking shots fired from a close range of four meters, given the speed of a .22 caliber bullet. The evidence failed to establish an intent to kill Monsanto beyond reasonable doubt. The Court affirmed the homicide conviction for Satajo’s death but modified the penalties. Bernal was sentenced to indeterminate penalties for two counts of homicide and acquitted of attempted murder.