G.R. No. L-2456

FACTS:
Defendants-appellants Elicerio Amoroso and Canuto Amoroso were convicted of the murder of Leoncia Bucalan. The trial court qualified the crime as murder, finding the presence of premeditation. It sentenced Canuto, as principal, to cadena perpetua and Elicerio, as an accomplice, to ten years of prision mayor. The prosecution, on appeal, argued that the qualifying circumstance was alevosia (treachery), not premeditation.

ISSUE:
Whether the crime committed should be qualified as murder, due to the presence of either premeditation or treachery, or as simple homicide.

RULING:
The Supreme Court ruled that the crime committed was simple homicide, not murder. Neither premeditation nor treachery was sufficiently established.

1. On Premeditation: The Court held that premeditation was not proven. The record did not show when the accused conceived the criminal design, nor that it was meditated upon and persisted in. Prior threats alone, without subsequent acts showing a firm, cool, and reflective persistence in carrying them out, are insufficient to constitute this qualifying circumstance.

2. On Treachery: The Court found that treachery (alevosia) was not proven. The lone eyewitness testified only in general terms that the deceased was assaulted, without describing the manner or form of the attack. The evidence was insufficient to establish with certainty that the accused employed means, methods, or forms that directly and specially ensured the execution of the crime without risk to themselves from any defense the victim might make.

3. On Criminal Liability: Both accused were held liable as principals of the crime of homicide. Elicerio’s liability was not merely that of an accomplice. The evidence showed a prior agreement between the two. Elicerio accompanied Canuto armed with an axe, assaulted the victim’s companion (Gregorio Pariño) to prevent defense of the victim, and his cooperation was real and effective such that the crime would not have been consummated without it.

4. On Penalty: The crime was properly classified as simple homicide. The aggravating circumstance of nocturnity was present, with no mitigating circumstance. The penalty was therefore imposed in its maximum degree. Applying its discretionary power, the Court imposed a lesser penalty on Elicerio.

The appealed judgment was REVERSED. Canuto Amoroso was sentenced to twenty years of reclusion temporal, and Elicerio Amoroso to seventeen years, four months, and one day of the same penalty. Both were ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the amount of 500 pesos, with costs.