GR L 33132; (August, 1979) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-33132, August 6, 1979
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DARWIN VELOSO Y MILITANTE, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
On the evening of May 20, 1970, Jesus Diez was fatally attacked in Barrio Sto. Tomas, Camaligan, Camarines Sur. While walking home with his younger brother Andres, Jesus encountered three men. He asked them where they were from, first in what was likely Tagalog and then in Bicol. One of the men retorted angrily, immediately stabbing Jesus with a dagger, while the other two fired multiple gunshots at him. The assailants then fled, commandeering a jeep. The autopsy revealed four gunshot wounds and one stab wound. The following day, a robbery-homicide occurred at the house of a former vice-governor in Naga City.
Investigators, theorizing the same group was involved, showed a picture of suspect Darwin Veloso to witnesses of the Diez killing. Both Andres Diez and another witness, Catalina Asico, positively identified Veloso as the one who stabbed Jesus. Veloso was apprehended and confessed to both the robbery-homicide and the killing of Jesus Diez, naming two accomplices. He was charged with Murder.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted Darwin Veloso of Murder and properly appreciated the attendant aggravating and qualifying circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the appreciation of the circumstances. The killing was qualified by abuse of superior strength. The attack by three armed men against an unarmed victim who posed no risk constituted a deliberate use of force overwhelmingly superior to ensure the act without danger to themselves. Treachery was also present, as the sudden and unexpected assault with a dagger and guns denied the victim any chance to defend himself.
However, the Court corrected the trial court’s errors regarding aggravating circumstances. Nocturnity was not aggravating as the meeting was accidental, not purposely sought. Use of an unlicensed firearm is not a generic aggravating circumstance under the Revised Penal Code. Recidivism could not be appreciated due to its absence in the information. Consequently, with the qualifying circumstances of abuse of superior strength and treachery, but without the erroneously applied aggravating circumstances, the penalty was properly imposable. As the required votes for the death penalty were not obtained, the sentence was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The Court upheld the indemnity award and criticized the poorly prepared information that restricted the prosecution.