G.R. No. L-75433. November 9, 1988.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RUBEN DIAZ y PEPITO and SERGIO DIAZ y PEPITO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On December 25, 1983, at around 1:00 AM in Cebu City, Jorge Villamor was sent by his sister to buy beer from a nearby store, accompanied by Doroteo Rosales. At the store, appellant Sergio Diaz confronted and punched Jorge. Immediately thereafter, appellant Ruben Diaz, Sergio’s brother, stabbed Jorge with a knife. The brothers fled. Eyewitnesses, including barangay tanods, positively identified them. The victim, before dying at the hospital, named Ruben and Sergio Diaz as his assailants. Ruben Diaz later admitted to the stabbing during questioning by barangay officials and revealed his brother’s location, leading to Sergio’s apprehension and the surrender of the knife used. An Information for Murder was filed against both brothers.
The defense presented Juanito Tatoy, who claimed he was the one who stabbed the victim after a quarrel, asserting the Diaz brothers were at home drinking during the incident. The trial court convicted both accused of Murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua. Sergio Diaz was later killed, leaving only Ruben Diaz to pursue this appeal, challenging the identification, the dying declaration, his extrajudicial confession, and the classification of the crime as Murder.

ISSUE

The core issues are whether the identity of the assailant was proven beyond reasonable doubt and whether the crime committed was Murder or the lesser offense of Homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from Murder to Homicide. The identity of Ruben Diaz as the assailant was established beyond reasonable doubt through the positive and credible testimonies of eyewitnesses, corroborated by the victim’s dying declaration. The Court upheld the admissibility and weight of the dying declaration, as it was made by the victim with full consciousness of his impending death, naming his attackers. The extrajudicial confession, while obtained without a warrant, was deemed admissible as it was given during a preliminary investigation by barangay officials, not during a custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings.
However, the Court found that the qualifying circumstance of treachery (alevosia) was not sufficiently proven. The evidence indicated the meeting between the victim and the appellants was casual and unexpected. The attack, beginning with a punch from Sergio, served as a forewarning to the victim before the stabbing by Ruben. The mode of attack was not deliberately chosen by the appellants to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to themselves; the victim’s vulnerable position was accidental. Therefore, the crime committed was Homicide, not Murder. With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, Ruben Diaz was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of eight years and one day of prision mayor as minimum to fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal as maximum. The civil indemnity was affirmed.