G.R. No. 137043 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JOEL SOLAYAO, ACCUSED-.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, finding the accused JOEL SOLAYAO, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder for the treacherous killing of the deceased Antonio Lacaba, but taking into consideration the lone mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua ; to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Antonio Lacaba the amount of P50,000.00, but without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency; and to pay the costs of this case, if any. Dissatisfied with the judgment JOEL interposed the instant appeal. In his Appellant's Brief, JOEL alleges that the trial court erred in I FINDING THE ACCUSSED [ sic ] GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF MURDER. II FINDING TREACHERY AS A QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THE KILLING OF THE VICTIM. III ASSUMING FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT THAT THE ACCUSSED [ sic ] IS GUILTY, HE IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF HOMICIDE WITH THE GENERIC MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER. In his first two assigned errors, JOEL argues that the narration of the prosecution witnesses failed to prove that the crime committed was murder qualified by treachery. He claims that the specific design or manner of the attack on ANTONIO was not proved. The mere fact that the accused was at the back of the victim at the inception of the attack or that the attack was sudden and unexpected would not forthwith establish the element of alevosia necessary to elevate homicide to murder. Thus, the crime committed was homicide, and not murder. In his third assigned error, JOEL asserts that the generic mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should have been appreciated in his favor to reduce the penalty imposed. Clearly then, JOEL does not seek for his acquittal but for the modification of the judgment of the court. He prays that he be convicted of homicide only and be sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty after appreciating in his favor the generic mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender and to pay an amount of indemnity according to current jurisprudence. In the Appellee's Brief, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) prays for the affirmance in toto of the trial court's judgment . It confirms that there was enough evidence on record to support the finding of the trial court on treachery. Our review of the evidence supports the conclusion of the trial court on the presence of treachery. For treachery to be appreciated, two elements must concur: (1) the means of execution employed gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate; and (2) the means of execution was deliberately or consciously adopted. [16] Julita Cabañero testified that the assault was unprovoked. There was no exchange of words between the victim and the accused at any time before the actual attack. The accused, upon approaching and coming near his unarmed victim, immediately stabbed him. The three blows were delivered continuously that the victim was able to run only a few meters