G.R. No. L-30450-51 September 30, 1974
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANTONIO BODUSO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The case involves the automatic review of a judgment convicting appellant Antonio Boduso of murder for the killing of Jose de Leon and frustrated homicide for the stabbing of Rolando Regalado. The incidents occurred on the evening of January 1, 1967, in Roxas City. Prosecution eyewitness Rolando Regalado testified that he and de Leon were drinking beer when Boduso joined them. After they refused his invitation for more drinks and left, Boduso followed and, without warning, stabbed de Leon and then Regalado as the latter questioned the attack. De Leon died from his wounds, while Regalado survived after extensive medical treatment. The trial court convicted Boduso of murder qualified by treachery and aggravated by evident premeditation, imposing the death penalty, and of frustrated homicide.
The defense presented a different version, claiming that another individual, Danton Anisco, was the actual assailant. Boduso alleged he merely witnessed the stabbing and was threatened by Anisco not to report it. He also contended that the qualifying and aggravating circumstances were not proven and claimed the mitigating circumstance of intoxication. The defense further pointed out that Boduso was a minor at the time of the crime’s commission.

ISSUE

The primary issues are: (1) the identity of the assailant; (2) the correctness of the qualifying and aggravating circumstances found by the trial court; and (3) the propriety of the penalties imposed, considering the claim of minority and intoxication.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties. On identity, the Court found the testimony of eyewitness Rolando Regalado credible and consistent, positively identifying Boduso as the assailant. The defense of denial and frame-up was rejected for being uncorroborated and improbable. Regarding the nature of the offenses, treachery (alevosia) was correctly appreciated for the killing of Jose de Leon. The attack was sudden and from behind, without any provocation or opportunity for defense, ensuring the execution without risk to the assailant. However, the Court found evident premeditation not proven, as the prosecution failed to establish the requisite elements of the time of conception, persistent reflection, and sufficient lapse of time.
The Court rejected the claim of intoxication as a mitigating circumstance, noting a lack of evidence that Boduso’s reason was impaired at the time of the stabbing. Crucially, the Court found that Boduso was under 18 years old at the time of the crime, entitling him to the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code. Consequently, for the murder charge, the penalty was reduced from death. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The conviction for frustrated homicide and the civil indemnities were affirmed.