G.R. No. L-76952 December 22, 1988
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JUANITO SABADO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution established that on December 1, 1983, appellant Juanito Sabado was in a tent with his brother-in-law, Emiliano Natura, and two others, Ceferino Natura and Pedro Delfin. After Ceferino and Delfin left the tent to get cigarettes, they heard a gunshot. Turning back, they saw Sabado in a stooping position, firing a gun successively at Emiliano, who was lying down. The witnesses saw Sabado flee after the shooting. The victim was found dead from multiple gunshot wounds. The victim’s father incurred funeral and related expenses totaling P8,560.00. In his defense, Sabado claimed that two policemen, Patrolmen Pituc and Imus, entered the tent and shot Emiliano while he was sleeping. He alleged he fled in fear and later reported this version to local barangay officials.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of Murder by giving credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses over the appellant’s defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found no reason to overturn the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility. The testimonies of prosecution witnesses Ceferino Natura and Pedro Delfin were found to be clear, consistent, and credible. They positively identified Sabado as the assailant who shot the victim while the latter was lying down. Their proximity to the event and the illumination from a kerosene lamp inside the tent allowed for a clear view. The Court rejected the defense’s claim of bias, noting the witnesses were relatives of both the victim and the appellant, negating any motive to falsely testify against him. The appellant’s alternative narrative implicating policemen was deemed inherently improbable and unsupported by evidence. The manner of attack constituted treachery. The victim, lying down and unprepared, was rendered incapable of any defense, ensuring the appellant’s safety from retaliation. The crime is therefore Murder qualified by treachery. Regarding the penalty, the Court applied the provisions of the 1987 Constitution abolishing the death penalty. The penalty for Murder is now reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua. With no modifying circumstances, the penalty was imposed in its medium period. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court modified the sentence to an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to eighteen (18) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The award of civil indemnity and damages was sustained.