G.R. No. 125332 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, vs. HERACLEO MONTE alias "RAKLING" AND DOMINGO ALBAO, DOMINGO ALBAO, accused-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered acquitting accused Heracleo Monte for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Upon the other hand, the Court finds accused Domingo Albao guilty of the crime of Murder as defined and penalized under Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code. There being no mitigating nor aggravating circumstance to offset the same, the Court hereby imposes upon said accused the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to suffer the accessory penalties thereof, and to indemnify the heirs of the victim Domingo Dayola the sum of P50,000.00 and to pay the cost. Accused Heracleo Monte is hereby ordered released immediately from the custody of the law unless he should be further detained for other offenses he is facing." A motion for reconsideration was filed by accused Albao alleging that the proper conviction should be for homicide and that the mitigating circumstances of provocation, passion and obfuscation should be appreciated in his favor. The trial court denied the motion in an Order dated November 13, 1995 stating that the basis in finding Albao guilty of murder was that the victim was stabbed at the back and that victim Dayola did not provoke the accused prior to the stabbing incident because the prosecution witness admitted that the stabbing incident was precipitated by a dispute over a cockfighting bet between Dayola and Monte. [21] Hence, Albao appealed the decision to this Court contending that the trial court erred: (1) in finding that the killing of Dayola was qualified by treachery and evident premeditation; and (2) in not finding that he is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of provocation. [22] In his brief, accused appellant Albao does not deny having killed Dayola but submits that the trial court erred in finding that treachery and evident premeditation attended the killing of Dayola which qualified the crime to murder as charged in the information. He claims that the stabbing incident happened unexpectedly and was just a result of a dispute over a bet between the victim and Heracleo Monte, thus, it was not a result of calculation, meditation and reflection on his part as he did not even know the victim before the incident. Accordingly, there could have been no evident premeditation. He also maintains that the incident happened in the presence of many people which could have stopped him (Albao) from stabbing the victim. The mere fact that the victim was hit at the back does not mean that treachery is present to qualify the crime to murder. He contends that the qualifying circumstances were not clearly established, thus the crime should only be homicide. We sustain the accused-appellant's contention that the crime committed is homicide. There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution without risk to himself arising from the