People v. Calara
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On March 6, 2004, at around 1:00 a.m., the victim, Sgt. Francisco Dulay, was fatally stabbed at a lugawan in Santiago City, Isabela, while about to board a tricycle. The incident was witnessed by the victim's brother, Dante Dulay, and cousin, Fernando Porquillano. Dante testified that he saw the appellant, Ariel Calara y Abalos, stab Francisco in the back shoulder, identifying him by a tattoo mark on his right arm and by hearing someone call him "Aying." Dante also stated that Francisco was simultaneously hit on the nape with a stone, but he could not identify the assailant. Fernando recounted being boxed by an assailant and then seeing the appellant stab Francisco. Francisco was brought to the hospital where he died from irreversible hypovolemic shock due to intrathoracic hemorrhage secondary to stabbing. The death certificate and autopsy report confirmed two stab wounds, one on the head and a fatal one on the back chest. The victim's wife testified on incurred expenses and damages. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Ariel Calara y Abalos guilty of murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, with civil liabilities for damages. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision with modifications, reducing the moral and exemplary damages and the loss of earning capacity. Appellant filed a notice of appeal. The Petition: Appellant Ariel Calara y Abalos appealed his conviction, denying the stabbing and pointing to "Dugong" as the perpetrator. He also argued against the presence of treachery as a qualifying circumstance and questioned the award of damages.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in giving full weight and credence to the allegedly inconsistent testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in considering the qualifying circumstance of treachery. Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in awarding the amounts for actual damages, moral damages, exemplary damages, and loss of earning capacity.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals with modifications, finding appellant Ariel Calara y Abalos guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He was ordered to pay the heirs of Francisco Dulay P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, and interest on all damages at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of judgment until fully paid.
Ratio Decidendi
On the alleged inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses' testimonies: The Court held that inconsistencies on minor and peripheral details do not impair the credibility of witnesses, especially when there is consistency in relating the principal occurrence and positive identification of the assailant. The supposed inconsistency regarding what the victim was doing when stabbed (paying the bill versus about to board a tricycle) was deemed inconsequential, with the Court noting that the former preceded the latter and Dante corrected himself. The failure of witnesses to recall the weapon or apparel was also considered insignificant, as the vital aspect was their positive identification of the assailant. Dante's identification was further bolstered by the victim's tattoo mark and hearing the nickname "Aying." Fernando also positively identified appellant as "Aying." On the qualifying circumstance of treachery: The Court found that treachery was correctly appreciated. The essence of treachery lies in a sudden and unexpected attack on an unsuspecting victim, depriving them of any chance to defend themselves and ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor. The post-mortem findings of a fatal wound on the victim's back chest clearly indicated that the victim was stabbed from behind, rendering him defenseless. This mode of attack ensured the commission of the crime without risk to the appellant. On the award of damages: The Court affirmed the award of damages, with modifications made by the Court of Appeals. The civil indemnity of P50,000.00 and moral damages of P50,000.00 were in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. The exemplary damages were increased to P30,000.00. An interest of 6% per annum was imposed on all damages awarded from the finality of judgment until fully paid, as a natural and probable consequence of the accused's acts.
Main Doctrine
The positive identification of the accused by prosecution witnesses, supported by physical evidence and corroborated by circumstantial evidence, prevails over the accused's weak defense of denial. Treachery is appreciated when the attack is sudden and unexpected, depriving the victim of any chance to defend himself.