:tttpublit of tbc llbilfppims

ol>upreme "1:nurt
mantra
TITTRD DIVISION

NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Cow-t. Third Division, issued a Resolution
dated ,June 23, 2021, which reads asfh!lmvs:

"G.R. No. 231378 (People of the Philippines v. Nick Candelario y

Sabado). - Challenged in this appeal 1 is the September 30, 2016 Decision 2 or
the Courl of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC Nu. 07288, which afiinned
with modifications the November 4, 2014 Decision 3 of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC), Branch 95, Quezon City in Criminal Case No. Q-11-168152
which found accused-appellant Nick Candelario y Sabado (Candelario) guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of Murder. He was sentenced lo suffer the penalty
of reefus ion perpetua and to pay the heirs of the deceased Elmer Tion (Tion)
the amounh of PhP 75,000.00 as civil indemnity; PhP 75,000.00 as moral
damages; PhP 30,000.00 as exemplary damages; and PhP 70,041.00 as actual
damages with interest at 6% per annum from the fmulity of judgment until
fully paid.

The Antecedents:

Candelario was charged with Murder in an lnformation4 that reads:

1lmt on or about the 26 th day of December 2010, in Quezon City,

Philippines, the said accused with intern to kill, qualified hy tTeachery, and
e,~deut premeditation did then and there willfully, unlawfolly aud feloniously
attack, assault and employ per~onal violence upon the pernon of one Elmer
Tiony Pelaez, byth<ln and there stabbing him on th<l different parts of his body.
thereby inflicting upon him serious and grave worm<.b which were the direct
and immediate cause of his ultillllltcly death, to the damage and prejudice of
the heirs of the o.aid Elmer Tion (Tinn).

' Ro/lo,pp. 199-200.

2 CA rollo. pp. 177-194: penned by i\ssoc~~te Justice ::Vfagdangal M. De l,c,m and concun'ed in by Associate
Justices Elihu A. Yb>ul<OL and '-!ina G. Antonio-Valenzuela.
Records, pp. 178-18~; pc-nncd by Judge Jose G. Paneda
' ld.at!-2.

- o-ver - "'
(357)
 Resolution •2 • G.R. No. 231378
.June 23, 2021

Accused planned the commission of the <,Time prior to its cxecLI[ion

until its commission and consciuu.sly adopting sndtlen and unexpected atta<,;k
upon lhe victim to ensure lb.a! victim will not be able Lo defend himself thus,
accused committed that allending circumstances of .,,,.;dent prcmcdi(a(ion mid
treachery.

Cootrary lo law.'

Candelario pleaded not gL1ilty to the crime charged. Thereafter, trial on

the merits ensued. Police Officer 2 Vlcben Padua (P02 Padua), P03 Fernando
Santiago (POJ Santiago), Joel Care no (Careno) and Dr. Angelic Oropilla (Dr.
Oropilla) testified for the prosecution while the defense presented the accuse-
appellant himsel las its lone witness.

Version of the Prosecution:

On December 26, 2010 at around 9:00 P.M., Tion and his cousin,
Carcno, were in fronl of Pan Di Pedro Rak.cry near the Five Star .13us Terminal
in Cubao, Quezon City w11iting for a jeepncy going to Gilmore, Quezon City.
While waiting, Tion bought a cigarette from accused-appellant. Howev(.,-r,
when Tion turned his back towards Candelario, the latter suddenly punched
Tion causing him lo fall on the ground. Thereafter, Candelario pinned Tion
down and stabbed him fi vc limes with a knife.

When P02 Padua and P03 Santiago arrived at the scene ofthe crime,
Candelario was nowhere to be found. The police officers immediately brought
Tion to the EaslAvenue Medical Center. \1./hen they returned to the place of
incident, Carena informed them that Candelario, who was wearing a
bloodstained orange t-shirt with a "Mercado" marking, boarded a Five Star
Bus bound to Dau, Pampanga.

Thus, the police officers coordinated with the North Luzon Expres~
\Vay (NLEX)toll personnel which, in tum, coordinated with the Five Star Bus
Station in Dau, Pampanga regarding the accused-appellant's whereabouts.

Thereal1cr, P02 Padua received a call from the Dau Police Station
informing him of the a1Test or Candelario. P02 Padua and P03 Santiago
proceeded to the Dau Police Station where they saw accused-appellant. TI1e
police officers then brought him to Police Station 7, Quezon City. Later, they
turned over accused-appellant and the bag which contained the bloodstained
shirt to the Criminal Investigation and Detection Unit (CTDU) at Camp
Karingal.

The following day, or on December 27, 2010, the police officers

informed Careno ol accused-appellant's arrest. Carcno went to the police
station and identified Candelario as the person who stabbed his cousin Tion.

' Id.
.;
- ,iver- (357)
Resolution -3 - G.R. :"fo. 231378
June23,2021

Dr. Oropilla, the Medico-Legal Officer J of thcl National Bureau of

Investigation (NBJ), conducted an aulopsy on t.h.e cadaver of Tion. She
executed the Certification of Post-Mortem Examination 6 and Autopsy Report
No. N-10-1129. 7 She also explained that Tion's stab wounds were fatal,
particularly the three stab wounds, a 6.5 cm wound near the middle of the
chest, a 5.5 cm wound and a 4.5 cm WOI.IJ\d with a 4.5 cm tailing. As to the
la.st wound, she ex.pounderl that Candelario misted the knife same before
pulling it out which damaged l"ion's liver. She added that the proximate cause
ofTion 's death was "multiple stab wounds anterior chest and abdomen."

Version of the Defense:

On December 26, 2010 at around 8:00 P.M., Candelario was at his sister
Eden Candclario's (Eden) house in Guadalupe. Then, he went to Tarim; on
hoard a five Star Bus. llowever, he was not able to reach Tarlac because he
was xco~ted by police officers in Pampanga He was then brought to a police
station in Arayat, Pampanga and subsequently transferred to Camp Karingal.
He denied any knowledge ahoul the death ofTion.

On cross examination, he testified that he was arrested while he was

having his merienda and not while on board the bus. He added that he was at
the Five Star Bus Station in Cubao, Quezon City at around 12 midnight when
he bumped into a man covered in blood. Ile knew that there was a stabbing
incident in the area as he witnessed the same from a distance of about 15
meters away but he could not identify the assailant or where the victim was
stabbed. He claimed to I-lave been wearing a striped t-shirt and denied
knowing Tion or Carena.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court:

On Novemh~r 4, 2014, the trial court rendered its Decision~ convicting

Candelario ofMurdcr.

The trial court found that accused-appellant, without any warning,

punched and stabbed Tion five times. lhe suddenness of the assault provided
no opportunity for Tion to defend him~el r. He immediately fell to the ground
yet accused-appellant continued to stah him. Hence, the RTC held that Tion 's
killing was Murder qualified \vilh treachery. The trial court did not appreciate
the qualifyiJ.1g circumstance of evident premeditation. lt also disregarded
xcused-appellanL'N denial and alibi in view or Carcno's positive
identification ofhim as the a~sailanl.

ld.at116
ld.atll7-118.
Supra note 3.
e,J
- over - (357)
 Resolution -4 - G.R. No. 231378
June23,2021

Thefallo of the RTC judgment reads:

WHEREFORE, the court Jind~ accused :'-/ICK CA)IDELARIO Y

SABADO "GUTT.TY'" beyond reasonable doubt of the crime ofMurder defined
and punished under ."uticlc 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby
sentences him to suffer the pen.alt) of REClUHON PERPE11JA; and t.o pay
the heirs of the deceased EUVIER TIO.K in the sllm of Php50,000.00 as civil
indemnity; and the farther sums of Php50,000.00 as moml dan:rn.ges and
Php70,041.00 a~ actual damages.

IT JS SO ORDERLD. 9

Ruling of the Court of Appeals:

In i11; assailed Dechion, 10 the CA denied accused-appellant's appeal.

According to the appellate court, the totality of evidence established with
moral certainty all the elements oflbe crime of Murder qualilied by treachery.
Careno personally witnessed the stabbing incident and identified the accused-
appellant as the person who stabbed fion. There was treachery because the
attack was sudden and without the slightest provocation on the part of Tion,
depriving him of any real chance to defend himself and thereby ensuring the
com.mission of the crime without risk to the aggressor. Tion had no reason to
expect that he would be assa,tlted by accused-appellant and stabbed with a
knife.

The appellate court ultimately affinned tl1c -'lovember 4, 2014 Decision

of the trial courl but with modification as to the amounts of civil indemnity,
morn! damages and exemplary damages, to wit: 11

WIIERE1"0RE, the appeal is DlSMlSSLD. The assailed Decision is

hereby AFl'lJU.l.1ED with MODTFTCJ\. TIO)IS, to wit:

WIIER.l.i.FORE. the court finds accused l\!CK

CANDELARlO Y SABADO "GCILTY" beyond reasonable doubt
of the crime of Murder defined and punished under Article 248 of
\he Revised Penal Code, and hereby sentences him to suITer the
penalty of REcu;sroN rERPETCA; and to pay the heirs of the
deceased ELMER TIOK in the sum of Php75,000.00 as civil
indemnity; and the further sums ofPhp75,000.00 and Php30,000.00
as moral damages and exemplary damages, respectively; and
Php?0,041.00 as actwil damages, with inteTest at six (6%) percent
per annum from the finality ofjudgmcnt llntil fully paid.

IT IS SO ORDERED." 12

Hence, this appeal.

' Records. p. 11.

10
Supra note 2.
lL CA rol/o, 193.
" Id.

- Qver -
 Resolutio11 -5 - G.R. No. 231378
June23,2021

Bolh the accused-appellant and plaintiff-appellcc adopted their respeLiive

briefs filed before the appellate court.

Accused-appellant raised the following errors:

WHETHER OR NOT THE C01:-Rl or APPEALS ERRED 1N CO:'-NICTING

ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF lv11}RDER DESPITE [THE] PROSECUTION'S
FAlLLRE TO PROV.l:: [lllS I GUH.T BEYO~D REASONABLE DOUBT.

II

WHETI-rER OR ~OT THE COl:-RT or APPEALS F.RRED 1N GIVING

WF.TGHT AND CREDENCE TO TIIE INCONSISTENT AND INCR.EDIBI.E
TESTNONIES OF THE PROSECL;TIO',J" \VTT::,,JESSES.

IT!

\VJIE1HER OR NOT TIIE COURT OF A..PPEALS ERRED lJ\ NOT

flNDING ACCUSFD-APPBLLA_'-/T Gl~Tl. TY O\fL Y OF HOMICIDE

IV

WHETHER OR NOT Tl-lli COURT OF APPEALS ERRED TK

DTSREGARDING .\CC1~SED-APPELL.A_'-ff'S DEFENSE. 11

Argument<; of the Defense:

Candelario argues that the prosecution failed to prove his identity as the
person who committed the crime charged. There was a reasonable possibility
of mistake regarding h.i.s apprehension which thereby violated his right to be
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.

Positive identification by an eyewitness is not always reliable.

Identification testimony has at least three components such as: a) V.'itnes1:1ing
a crime whether by a by-stander or a ,ictim involves perception of an event
actually occuning; b) the witness must memori/.c the details of the evenL; and
c) the -witness mu1:1t be able to recall and communicate accurately. In addition,
the prosecution must establish the credibility of the eyewitness regarding his
identification of the accused.

Accused-appellant claims that lhc prosecution failed to prove Carcno ·s

credibility as an eyewitness. First, Carena did not give any particular
identification of the accused-appellant to the police officers. He merely
described the accused-appellant as a cigarette vendor, smaller than Tion and
wearing an orange t-shirt. Hence, it was impossible for him to have outrightly
and unmistakably recognize accused-appellant at the police station when the
latter was no longer wearing the blood-stained orange t-shirt.

lJ ld. at 34-50.

- over-
"'
{357)
Resolution .6. G.R. No. 231378
June 23, 2021

Second, the accu<:cd-appellant was presented as a single suspect for

purposes of identification which was a grossly suggestive identification
procedure that docs not preclude the possibility of misidentification. What
transpired is worse than a "show-up" identification where the suspect alone h
brought face to face V<'ith the witness for identification.

Third, the Dau police officers, in effecting his arrest, relied only on the
description thaL he was wearing a blood-stained orange t-shirt. However, at
the time of his aucst, he clallned that he was no longer wearing an orange
t-shirt. In addition, the prosecution failed to present the Dau police officer who
allegedly inspected the bag which contained the bloodstained orange t-shirt.
Neither was the bloodstained orange t-shirt preS!.,'Ilted by the prosecution as
eYidencc which served as accu~ed-appdlant's primary identilic1c1.ti.on.

F(mrth, it is highly unbelievable for accused-appellant Lo openly

commit a detest:,blc act in front of a bakery and near a bus terminal where
pedestriiin traffic is heavy. Also, it is illogical for accused-appellant to still
have the luxury of time to gather his belongings before attempting to escape
by boarding a bus bound for Dau, Pampanga. The tact that he WiiS carrying a
bag during his arrest is mo.re consistent with his version that he was indeed on
his way to Tarlac.

Fifth, the prosecution witnesses' accounts of what transpired we.re

inconsistent on vital points. Carena testified that the police office.rs we.re
informed by a by-stander from the bakel)' that accused-appellant fled the place
of incident and boarded a bus bound to Dau, Pampanga. However, PCB
Santiago testified that it was Carena who informed them ofthe whereabouG
of accused-appellant. PCB Santiago also testi lied that they rushed the victim
to the East Avenue Medical Center and came back to the place of incident
where they were informed by a male person, who happened to be Carena, that
the accused-appellant was wearing a bloodstained Oriingc t-shirt with
markings "Mercado" and boarded a bus bound for Oau, Pampanga.

Moreover, the police officers' testimonies as to who brought Tion to

the hospital were also incon~i8tenl. P02 Padua testified that the other pollce
officers brought Tion lO the East Avenue .\1cdical Center while P03 Santiago
te~tificd ti-lat he, P02 Padua and POI Castillo brought Tion to the hospital.
However, P03 Santiago could not haYe brought Tion to the hospital as he was
instructed by P02 Pad11a to follow the bu.~ going to Dau, Pampanga. Also, in
their Joint-Affidavit, the police officers attested that after bringing Tion to the
hospital, they proceeded to NL.EX. However, P03 Santiago testified that they
went back to the place of incident.

As regards the qualifying circumstance of treachery, accused-appellant

argt1es that it wa~ not established beyond reasonable doubt since no evidence
was presented to support it. The alleg<ed attack was not treacherous; it was not
consciously or deliberately adopted for his advantage; it was not preconceived
or deliberately adopted but was merely triggered by sudden provocation on

- over - d~7)
Resolution •7 • G.R. No. 231378
.Tune 23, 2021

Tion's part. As testified to by Careno, he saw Tion and accused-appellant

inLensely staring at each other. After lighLing his cigarette and turning his back
towards the accused-appellant, the latter immediately boxed Tion on bis face.
When Tion fell on the ground, accused-appellant went on Lop of him and
stabbed him. According LO Candelario, the attack could not be considered as
trc,achcrous because it was not sudden or unexpected. T11ere was also
provocaLion on the victim's part. Hence, accused-appellant should have been
convicted only of homicide and not murder.

Lastly, his defense of denial or alibi should have not beell disregarded
by the appellale court.

Arguments of the Prosecution:

On the other hand, the prosecution argues that it sufficiently established

beyond reasonable doubt accused-appellant's guilt for the crime ofmm·dcr.
Careno, who was three meters away, could not have mistakenly identified
accu.;;cd-appellant as the perpetrator as he personally witnessed the whole
incident from the time Tion bought a cigaretle from accused-appellant lllltil
the stabbing incident.

Also, Careno immediately described lo the police officer acn1sed-

appcllant's height and physique when he was interviewed at the East Avenue
Medical Center.

Nevertheless, any irregularity as to the out-of-court identification of

accused-appellant as the perpetrator of the crime was already cured by
Careno's positive identification of him in court as the cigarette vendor who
punched and stabbed his cousin Tion. An out-of-courL identi Ii.cation does not
necessarily foreclose admissibility of an independent in-court identification.
In addition, accused-appellant testi Ged that he neither knew Careno nor was
he aware of any reason why he would implicate him in the killing of his
cousin. Accused-appellant failed to give any explanation as to why Careno
would single him out as the one who stabbed and killed his cousin Tion.
Notably, accused-appellant admitted his presence at the place of incident.

With regard to the alleged discrepancies in Careno's leslimony and his

affidavit, the rule is that inconsistencies between the testimony in open court
and the affidavit do not impair credibility since affidavits are often taken ex
parte and tend to be incomplete or inaccurate for lack of searching inquiries
by the investigating officer. As to the alleged inconsistency in the testimony
o[ Careno of having seen the accused-appellant board the bus going to Dau,
Pampanga, the same is nol an essential clement of the crime of murder and
docs not negate the fact that Careno indeed saw accused-appellant stab Tion.
Inconsistencies as lo minor or collateral matters do not diminish the value or
the testimony in tenns of truthfulness or weight.

As to the alleged contradictory statements of the police officers as to

who actually brought Tion to the hospital, a careful reading ofthe testimony

- over -
"'
(357)
Resolution -8 - G.R. No. 231378
.Tune 23, 2021

of P03 Santiago wmtld show that he was among those who brought the victim
to the hospital. lie then returned to the place of incident and proceeded to Dau,
Pampanga after thr:y were informed by the Dau Police Station that accused-
appellant had already been mresled.

Lastly, the prosecution asserts that tTeachery was duly established.

Accused-appellant first punched Tion on the face which caused the latter to
fall on the ground. Tion attempted to fight back but accused-appellant pinned
him on the ground and continuously stabbed hi.in on different parts of his
body. As per Carena's testimony, it only took less than five mlnuLes for
accused-appellant to execute the crime. Clearly, accused-appellant employed
means to ensure the death or the victim by punching Tion to instantly weaken
his defense, immobilizing him by pinning him on the ground and while in that
position, delivered stabbing thrusL~ at different parts of his body.

Our Ruling

Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as mnended by Republic Act

No. 7659, provides:
Article 248 . .'.furder. ··- Any pcr:son who, no( falling \\·ithin the
prnvision~ of A,-tielc 246 shall kill ano1her. shall be gLiilty of murder and shall
be pllillshed by reclusion perpptua, lo death ii" <.,ommi(led with any or the
following attendant circumstances;
1. \Vith trea~h.,,-y, taking advamage or Mcperior strength, willi the aid of
armed men. or employing mearu; Lo \'i<eaken lhe defense or of means or persons
lo insllrn or afford imp1mi1y.
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise.
3.13y me.ins of inundation, fire, poison, explo~ion, shipwreck, stranding
ofa vessel, derail men[ or assaL11l upon a railroad, fall ofan airship, or by means
oJ" motor vehicles, or with the nsc of any other means involving great waste and
rum.

4. On oc,;asiou or any 01· the calamiti-::s cnumeratcd in the preceding

paragraph, or of an eunhquake, scrnption of a volcano, destructive cyclone,
epidemic or other public calamity.
5. \Vilh avidCllt premeditation.
6. With crnelly, by <leliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering
of the victim, or omrab,jng or sconing at hi~ pcrson or corpse.

Murder has the fol lowing clements:

(1) that a person was kilkd;

(2) that the accused killed him or her;

(3) that the killing ,vas al(ended by any of the qualil)ing circumstance~
mentioned in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code; and

- 1/Wff -
""
(3;':7)
 Resolution .9 . G.R. No. 231378
June 23, 2021

(4) that the killing is not parricide or infanticide. 14

It is undisputed that the victim Tion died due to "multiple stab wounds
anterioT chest and abdomen" on DecembeT 26, 2010 as evidenced by the
Certification of Post-Mo1tem Exam.iJmtion and Autopsy Report l\'o. N-10-
1129. However, accused-appellant now as~ails his positive identification as
the pe:rpctrator of the crime.

Peuple v. Teehankee. Jr. 15 adopted the totality of circumstante8 test in

resolving the admissibility o[ and relying on out-of-court identification of
suspects, viz.:

Out-of-court identification i~ conducM by lhe police in various way~. ll

is done thrn show-ups where lhe s,cspect alone is brOL1ghl face to face with !he
witness for identification. It is done thru mug shots where photographs arc
shown lo lhe wituess to idcntil)" the Sllspect It is also done lbru line-ups where
a witness identifies the suspect from a group of-persons lined up for the purpose.
Since corruption of out-of-cornt identification contaminates the integrity ofin-
court identification during the trial of the cas<l. G<JITTLS have fashioned out mies
to assure its laimess dlld its compliance v.ith !he requirements of cons!itution.tl
due process. In rcsoh·in:?, the Jdmissibility of and rel)ing on om-of-
courl identification of ~uspecls. courts have adopted the
totality of circum~larn;es test where they consider the following factors, viz.: (l)
the witness' op-porlunily to view the criminal at the tune of the crime; (2) the
witness' degree 01· alkntionatthattimc; (3) the wx,1uac; of illlY prior description
given b;· lhe v,itness; (4) the level or certainty demonstrated b) lbe witness at
the iden!ification; (5) the length of time between lh,;; cnme and
the identification; and, (6) the suggeqivenes~ of the identification procedure. 16

Careno ,.-vas just about three meters away when the slahhing incident
happened in front of Pan Di Pedro Bakery with a numher of by-standers.
Carcno was able to descrihe: (a) tl1e interaction between Candelario and Tion
prior to the punching and stabbing incident; (b) the fact that the Tion bought a
cigarette from Candelario; (c) how Candelario punched Tion at his face when
the latter turned his back; ( d) how Candelario went on top of and continuously
stabbed Tion; and ( e) that Candelario boarded a bus bound for Dau, Pampanga
after the stabbing incident. Ca:rcno even in±Ormed the police officers of
accused-appellant Candelario's built and height as well as the orange colored
t-shirt he was wearing, viz.;

Q l)o you remember whm this Kick Candelario ·was wearing al that time'?
A He was \Yearing an orilllge colored t-shirt, sir. 17

xxxx

Q Did the police officers talk to you

A Yes, sir al the bospitol they asked my name and address

" People v. Di:map,lu, 816 Phil. 523, 540 (1111 7) ciling Peoplev. Las !',ha:,, 739 Phil. 501, 524 (20 14),
" 3 19 Phil. 118 (1995).
1' Jd.atl80.
" Records. TSN February 28, 2012, p. 6.

- over -
"'
(357)
Resolution -10 - G.R. No. 231378
.June 23, 2021

Q Other than that did you give Lhe information regarding the SLL~p<let~
A Yes, sir. 1 told to the polke officers the actual incident about llie
suspect, I gave tu the police Lhe height. the built. sir.

COL"RT: (lo the 1vitness)

Q Ho\\• about the clothes that the s,c~ped was wearing at the time of the
incident'?
A Yes. Your Jlonor. 18

Contrary to the contention of the accused-appellant, ('.,areno was able to

see the face or his cousin's assailant and de~cribc in detail the events that
transpired on that day. He positively identified Candelario the following day
upon the latter's arrest. Accused-appellant"s physical appearance and the
events that transpired were still fresh in Carcno's memory when he positively
identified Candelario a5 the assailant ofhis cousin Tion.

In addition, Carena also informed the police officers of his buill and
height and the fact that he hoarded a Five Star bus going to Dau, Pampanga
as identi rying fal-1:ors for llis arrest, in addition to the color of the shirt he was
wearing on that ruly. The fact that accused-appellant was no longer 'wearing
the same orange colored t-shirt when Carcno identified him as the assailant in
a police station in Quezon City did not diminish his credibllity as an
eyewilnc5s. lt is settled that an out-of-court identification does not necessarily
foreclose the admissibility of an in-COL!rl identification and that, even
assuming that an out-of-court identification was tainted with irregularity, the
subsequent identi Ii cation in court cured any flaw that may have attended it. 19
Carena's in-court identification of accused-appellant was certain and
categorical when he wa~ asked to idenli ry him from among the people inside
the courtroom.

Carena categorically, candidly, and positively identified Candelario as

the perpetrator of the c1ime. His identification of accused-appellant is worthy
of credence and weight. hl People v. Cenahonon, 20 thiH Court said:

An allirmative testimony merits grealeT weight than a negative one,

especially when !he fomtcr comes .from a credible \\·itnc~s. Categorical and
positive identification of an accused, without any showing of ill motive on the
part of the witness testifying on the matter, prevails over alibi and denial, which
arc negative and sdt:scrving evidence undeserving of real weight in law unless
substantiated by clear and convincing evidenee. 21 (Citation omitted.)

Moreover, there was no ill motive on the part of Carena in lestifying

against accused-appellant and in identifying him as the person who killed
Tion. In fact, both Ca.reno and accused-appellant admitted that they had no
such grudge or misunderstanding as would impel Careno to wrongly impute
10 him the commission of the crime. Carena, as the victim's cousin, had more

"Id.al 16.
" People v. Lugnasin, 781 Pbil. 701. 715 (2016) cilmg People v. Sabangan, 723 Phil. 591 (20 J3),
'" 554 Phil. 415 (2007).
11
Id. at 430.

- over -
"'
(357)
 Resolution -11 - G.R. Ko. 231378
June 23, 2021

reason to ensure that the real perpetrator of the crime be punished to avenge
the senseless death of Tion. It w·ou.ld be unnamral for a victim's relative to
falsely accuse somebody other than the real culprit in order to vindicate tlie
uimc. llence, absent any compelling reason to believe that Careno acted with
improper motive, his teslimony is entitled to full faith and credit.

As to the alleged discrepancies in the testimonies and affidavitN of the

police officers concerning what transpired after the stabbing incident,
particularly as to who brought Tion Lo the hospital, who informed them of the
whereabouts of the suspect and whether they proceeded to the NLEX to
apprehend the accused-appellant, these inconsistencies, if any, referred to
minor details and did not diminish tile credibility of the police officers as
witnesses. These matters were inconsequential and did not substantially affect
the outcome of the case. Besides, the proseculion has duly established that
Tion was killed and Careno witnessed the stabbing incident. Thereafter,
Careno informed the police officers about the incident and the accused-
appellant's attempt to escape by boarding a bus going to Dau, Pampanga
which eventually resulted in the latter's arrest.

Moreover, the Joint Affidavit executed by P03 Santiago and P02

Padua is generally subordinate in importance to their testimonies in court.
Besides, a perusal of both the joint affidavit and their testimonies sho\.\- that
upon arrival at the place or incident. Careno informed them or the suspect's
description and whereabouts. Thereafter, they br0c1ght Tion to the hospital.
Aftcrn..-ards, they proceeded lo and coordinated with the NLEX to apprehend
accused-appellant who was on board a Five Star bus hound for Dau,
Pampanga. Aller accused-appellant's arre~t by the Dau police officers, they
turned him over to the QueLOll City police officers. Minor disparities in the
narration of witnesses do not impair their credibility as long as their
testimonies are coherent and intrinsically believable on the whole; in
particular, their consistency in the narration of the principal occt1rrence and in
the positive id<.Titification of the accused. 22 Besides, minor variances in
witnesses' testimonies serve to strengthen their credibility as they negate the
suspicion of a rehearsed tesli-mony. 23

As opposed to the clear and positive testimonies of the prosecution

witnesses, accused-appellanL's defense of denial does not convince the Court.
He admitted that he was at the place of incident but imputed the cornmi&sion
of the crime to another person. He even admitted on cross-examination that
he was wearing an orange t-shi.rt at that time but a certain person cov<.-rcd in
blood bumped into him and stained his shirt with blood. Thus, he had to
change into another shirt. Indeed, to claim that another person killed the victim
is easy to fabricate as it is negati-ve and self-serving and unsubstantiated by
clear and convincing evidence. Hence, it merits no weight in law and could

"- People vs. De Leon, 428 Phil. 556, 573 (2002) citmgPeople v,. Khor, 366 Phil. 762 (1999), People vs,
Ebruda, 357 Phil. 345 (1998) and Swna/po,i,; "'- Courl ofAppeals, 125 Phil. 1218 (1997).
33 People v. Bem"g, 437 Phil. 748, 758 (2002) citing People vs. Dmglasan, 334 Phil. 691 (1997) and People
v,. Khor, supra note 21.
- over -
 Resolution - 12 - G.R. No. 231378
June 23, 2021

not be given evidentiary value as against the testimony of credible v,itncsses

who testified on affirmative matters. 24

We sustain the findings of the trial court and the appellalc court that
treachery attended the commission of the crlme. Treachery is present when
the following elements are present: (a) the employment of means, methods or
manner of execution to ensure the safoly of the offender from defensive or
retaliatory ads of the victim and (b) the deliberate adoption by the offender of
such means, methods or manner of execution. The essence of treachery is the
sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on an unsuspecting victim who
gave no provocation, 25 without affording the latter any real chance to defend
hlmself and thereby ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the
aggressor. 26

Evidence on record sho-w-s that Tion wa~ totally unaware of the sudden
and impending attack as he already turned his back after buying cigarette from
the accused-appellanL Lincxpectedly, accused-appel Iant punched Tion at bis
face. When the victim fell to tl1e gror.md, accused-appellant v..enl on top of
him and once immobilized, he continuously stabbed the victim on his chest
with a knife. At the moment Tion fell to the ground, he was in no position to
defond himself as the latter immediately pinn1;d him down by going on top of
him. Candelario never afforded his victim any chance LO defend himself. By
pinning Tion dov,n and stabbing him on his chest, accused-appellant ensured
the commission of the crime wil.liout any risk to hlmself. Evidently, no
altercation took place betv,reen Tion and accused-appellant prior to the
stabbing incident and Tion gave no provocation whatsoever. All these
circumstances indicated the employment of treachery in the commission of
the crime.

Lastly, the killing is obviously not parricide or infanticide.

Accordingly, the penalty of reclusion perpe.tua was currcGily imposed by the
trial court upon the accused-appellant for the crime of Murder. TI1e damages
awarded and the imposition of interest were in accordance "\vith the prevailing
jurisprudence.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISIDSSED. The SepLember 30, 2016

Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07288, is hereby
AFFIRMED.

24 Id. ciling People vs. Se!1"ano. 634 Phil. 406 (2UU l)

25 Id. citing People vs, NarlUJ. 337 Phil. 355 (1997) & Peoplev,. Valle,;, 334 Phil. 763 (1997).
16 Id. citing People vs Dagami, 394Phil 482 (1999).

- over -
 Resolution - 13 - G.R. No. 231378
June 23, 2021

SO ORDERED."

By authority of the Court:

°M\ !,):\> c.,. ~o3f

MISAEL DOMINGO C. BA TTUNG Jfl
Division Clerk oif·Court
~·
H ~fl •

PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

Special & Appealed Cases Service
DOJ Agencies BuiJding
East Avenue cor. NIA Road
Diliman, I I 04 Quezon C ity

COURT OF APPEALS
CA G.R. CR HC No. 07288
1000 Manila

OFFICE OF TI IE SOLICITOR GENERAL

134 /\morsolo Srreet
Legaspi Village, 1229 Makali C ity

The Presiding Judge

REG IONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 95, 1100 Quezon City
(Crim. Gase No. Q-11·168152)

The Superintendent
New Bilibid Prison
BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS
I i70 Muntin lupa City

Mr. Nick Candelario y Sabado

c/o The Superintendent
New Bilibid Prison
BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS
I 770 Muntinlupa City

PHJLIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

Research Publications and Linkages Office
Supreme Court, Manila
[[email protected] J

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE

Supreme Court, Manila
(For uploading pursuantto A.M. 12- 7-!-SC)

LrBRARY SERVICES
Supreme Court, Manila

Judgment Division
JUDICIAL RECORDS OFFICE
Supreme Courr, Manila

G.R. No. 231378 (357)

URES