People v. Amazan
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On April 27, 1997, at around 7:00 p.m. in Barangay San Vicente, Dimasalang, Masbate, 14-year-old Alberto Arma and his father Artemio went to their farm, 30 meters from home, to graze their carabao; while Artemio tethered it to a coconut tree amid dark cornfields and coconut groves (sunset at 5:58 p.m., moonrise at 10:00 p.m.), Jerito Amazan suddenly hacked him on the head with a bolo, followed by Jaime Amazan stabbing him, causing fatal parieto-occipital skull fractures and abdominal contusion; Alberto cried for help, prompting mother Amparo (Jerito's aunt) and daughter-in-law Lorna to rush over, where Amparo saw the three accused (Jerito, Jaime, neighbor Danilo Villegas) flashlight-illuminating Artemio's body, inquired of Jerito, but was hacked on the left face (7 inches long, 1 inch deep) by Jaime; fleeing towards home, they met brother Antonio, who joined to aid father but was hacked on left face, neck, and hand dorsum (6 inches face, 1.5 inches deep neck, 4x2 inches hand) by Danilo; motive traced to Jaime's jealousy over suspected affair between Artemio and Jaime's wife; defense countered they were first attacked by armed Armas while gathering tuba nearby, Jerito parried and hacked Artemio defensively, Jaime grabbed and struck, Amparo swung wood at Jerito who evaded and hit her, with Jaime suffering non-fatal shoulder/forearm/leg stabs treated at same hospital. Procedural History: Informations filed August 5, 1997: Crim. Case 8494 (Murder of Artemio, all three accused, alleging premeditation/treachery/superiority/nighttime); 8496 (Jaime for Frustrated Murder of Amparo, premeditation/treachery/superiority); 8497 (Danilo for Frustrated Murder of Antonio, premeditation/treachery); accused pleaded not guilty, joint trial ensued with prosecution via Alberto, Amparo, Antonio, Drs. Alino/Tamayo (non-fatal injuries to survivors, fatal head hacks to victim); defense via accused, Jaime's medical cert, Brgy. Capt. Almocera (found bloodstains on Arma land), Hermogenes Apues (site location); RTC Branch 44 Masbate (July 8, 1998) convicted all of Murder (reclusion perpetua, P50k indemnity, no aggs), Jaime of Attempted Homicide (1 year, voluntary surrender), Danilo of Attempted Homicide (1 year 10 months); accused appealed raising credibility, treachery absence, no conspiracy, self-defense, guilt proof. The Petition: Accused-appellants assigned errors: (I) Erroneous credence to prosecution witnesses amid inconsistencies (Alberto's confusion on attackers/date/nervousness/admissions, Amparo/Alberto variance on hack location/timing, affidavit-court discrepancies on positions); (II) Treachery unproven sans conscious adoption/frontal attack; (III) No conspiracy evidence/common purpose; (IV) Rejected self-defense/defense of relative; (V-VI) Insufficient proof for Jaime/Danilo attempted offenses.
Issue(s)
Whether prosecution witnesses' testimonies deserve full credence despite minor inconsistencies and youth/nervousness. Whether treachery attended Artemio's killing. Whether conspiracy bound all three accused to murder. Whether self-defense or defense of relative justified acts. Whether Jaime committed attempted murder (not homicide) on Amparo with superior strength. Proper penalties, circumstances, and damages.
Ruling
RTC decision MODIFIED: (1) All three guilty of Murder (Crim. 8494), Jerito/Jaime to reclusion perpetua (voluntary surrender); Danilo reclusion perpetua (no mitigator); +P50k moral damages; (2) Jaime guilty Attempted Murder (Crim. 8496), indeterminate 2y4m prision correccional min to 8y prision mayor min (superior strength, voluntary surrender); (3) Danilo guilty Attempted Homicide (Crim. 8497), indeterminate 4m arresto mayor med to 4y2m prision correccional med.
Ratio Decidendi
On Witness Credibility (Issue I): Trial court's evaluation binds appellate review absent overlooked substantial facts; minor inconsistencies (Alberto's confusion on dual hacks/date due to 14-year-old nervousness/darkness amid sudden violence/cornfields; Amparo's added details on inquiry pre-hack; affidavit variances on exact positions un-confronted per Rule 132 §13) enhance credibility by negating rehearsal, especially for young/inexperienced witnesses overwhelmed by courtroom (People v. Panlilio); no sane witness admits falsity sans misunderstanding questions; multiple witnesses (Amparo/Alberto) corroborate Danilo hacking Antonio, outweighing shock-induced variances; defense injuries minor/non-fatal vs. victims' severity improbable for aggression reversal. On Treachery (Issue II): Art. 14(16) RPC requires execution means denying defense/retaliation opportunity, deliberately adopted; frontal claim belied by Dr. Tamayo's medico-legal (Exh. G): bilateral parieto-occipital hacking wounds (5in/4.5in with skull fractures, fatal massive hemorrhage) indicating posterior attack while victim tethered carabao unaware, first blow rendering helpless (People v. Penaflorida); Jerito's concealed bolo draw until close, flashlight use, nocturnal setting (no moon) ensured no-risk execution. On Conspiracy (Issue III): Art. 8 RPC: agreement deducible from mode—three armed accused converged on lone victim, jointly assaulted (Jerito/Jaime direct hacks, Danilo post-mortem check via flashlight ensuring death per Amparo/Alberto), no intervention, collective flight; binds all to murder though Danilo struck later (People v. Alib/Perez). On Self-Defense/Defense of Relative (Issue IV): Accused bear burden (Art. 11 RPC via People v. Emberga/Jacobo): no unlawful aggression (posterior wounds contradict frontal defense claim, no Arma motive as relatives/neighbors, minor defense vs. severe victim injuries); means disproportionate; no provocation part. On Jaime's Offenses (Issue V): Jaime committed attempted murder (not homicide) on Amparo with superior strength. Superior strength absorbed in treachery for murder (People v. Cawaling) but aggravates Jaime's vs. unarmed Amparo (U.S. v. Consuelo); Antonio's similar but no superior strength=attempted homicide. On Penalties, Circumstances, and Damages (Issue VI): No evident premeditation (no plan timeline/acts/reflection per People v. Ladit); no nighttime (not deliberately sought per People v. Atop); voluntary surrender for Jerito/Jaime (immediate post-hospital/police, fear irrelevant per People v. Clemente); Amparo's non-bleeding facial hack 2hrs later non-fatal but intent-to-kill via vital area=attempted murder (Art. 248/51 RPC); penalties indeterminate per ISL/Art. 64 (mitigated attempt: corr/pris may min; unmitigated: arresto may/pris corr med); P50k indemnity + P50k moral upheld/added (People v. Suplito/Atop/Panida).
Main Doctrine
Treachery requires (1) means ensuring execution without risk to offender from victim's defense, and (2) deliberate adoption thereof, proven here by sudden nocturnal bolo attack from behind on unsuspecting victim tethering carabao, as confirmed by fatal parieto-occipital skull fractures indicating posterior assault depriving Artemio of retaliation opportunity. Conspiracy exists upon agreement to commit felony, deducible from coordinated acts: all accused armed with bolos converged on victim, participated or facilitated killing without stopping it, verified life status post-assault, and fled together, binding all to murder liability regardless of individual blows. Abuse of superior strength (three armed males vs. lone unarmed farmer) is absorbed in treachery for principal murder but independently aggravates attacks on unarmed female victim, per U.S. v. Consuelo. Voluntary surrender mitigates even if prompted by reprisal fear, as it spares State apprehension efforts, reducing reclusion perpetua to straight term under Art. 63 RPC. Attempted murder (not mere homicide) obtains where vital facial hacks evince intent to kill, though non-fatal due to medical intervention, warranting indeterminate penalty two degrees lower than consummated murder.