People v. Acabo

 

People v. Acabo

G.R. No. 229823

February 27, 2019

FACTS:

                RTC and CA convicted Roger Acabo of murder. Alberto Paltinga, the victim was going uphill to Sitio Talatala,Siitt, Siaton, Negros Oriental when the appellant shot Alberto with a gun. Witness Josephine saw this and Acabo attempted to shoot her but the gun did not fire so she ran and hid in the bushes. Thereafter, the appellant ran after Alberto and shot him again. The defense of the accused-appellants was that he was working in a construction project. Engr. Te testified that he monitored the attendance of the construction workers and was verified by Stephen. Hoever, Gregorio, on cross-examination, admitted that he did not actually see appellant report fro work at 8am Sept. 19, 2014.

ISSUE:

                Whether or not they are liable for murder.

HELD:

                Yes. Josephine’s testimony suffers no material inconsistency as would affect its credibility. Josephine’s account of the incident was, moreover, consistent with Dr. Tan’s post-mortem examination results finding that Alberto suffered two gunshot wounds. The claim of appellant that the witness’ action of not completely running away is contrary to human experience did not persuade the Court. It held that “there is no standard form of behavior when one is confronted by a shocking incident.” To establish treachery the following conditions must be established: 1.) that the victim was in no position to defend himself when attacked; and 2.) the offender deliberately adopted the specific manner of the attack. Alberto and Josephine were walking uphill totally unaware of the impending attack upon their person. Suddenly, appellant and Pael waylaid them. Appellant thereafter short Alberto who fell downhill. Appellant then fired a 2^nd shot to ensure his death. Certainly, Alberto had no opportunity to defend himself. He was unaware of the attack and was caught off guard when his assailant suddenly approached and shot him with a gun. The stealth by which the attack was carried out gave Alberto no chance to evade the same. Indeed, the unexpected assault aupon the victim and the fact that the assailant did not sustain any injury evinces treachery. Undoubtedly, appellant consciously adopted the mode of attacking Alberto who had no inkling of the forthcoming attack and was completely defenseless. The attack was executed in such a manner as to ensure the killing of Alberto without risk to appellant. The fact that Alberto had a bolo tucked in his waist was of no consequence. What is decisive is that the attack was executed in a manner that the victim was rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate. Also all the elements of the crime of murder were proven 1.) that a person was killed; 2.) that the accused killed that person; 3.) that the killing was attended by treachery and 4.) that the killing is not parricide or infanticide. Wherefore, the appeal is dismissed. Roger Acabo is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder.