Fantastico vs. Malicse

In a prosecution for attempted murder, the Information need not allege that the injuries inflicted are "necessarily mortal" to be sufficient under Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, provided it alleges the elements under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. Furthermore, abuse of superior strength is present when there is a notorious inequality of forces between armed aggressors and an unarmed, intoxicated victim, deliberately taken advantage of by the aggressors, even if the attack was spontaneous and therefore lacked treachery.

On the afternoon of June 27, 1993, Elpidio Malicse, Sr., while intoxicated, confronted his sister Isabelita Iguiron at her house in Pandacan, Manila, resulting in a commotion that was initially pacified by the Barangay Chairman. After returning home, Elpidio decided to go back to Isabelita's house to offer reconciliation. Upon his arrival, he was met with hostility by Isabelita's son Titus and son-in-law Gary Fantastico. When Elpidio kicked the door open, he was attacked by multiple assailants including Salvador Iguiron (with a rattan stick), Gary Fantastico (with a tomahawk), and Rolando Villanueva (with a lead pipe), resulting in serious injuries including bilateral leg fractures and multiple head lacerations.

• On June 27, 1993, Elpidio Malicse, Sr. was outside his sister Isabelita Iguiron's house in Pandacan, Manila when he heard his nephew Winston throwing invectives at him, leading to a confrontation where Elpidio slapped Isabelita while under the influence of alcohol.
• The Barangay Chairman pacified Elpidio and persuaded him to go home, where he drank coffee before deciding to return to Isabelita's house to offer reconciliation.
• On his way, Elpidio passed by Kagawad Andy Antonio's house and requested accompaniment but was told to go back home; he proceeded alone.
• Upon reaching Isabelita's house, Elpidio encountered her son Titus Iguiron and son-in-law Gary Fantastico, who responded with curses ("putang ina mo, and kulit mo, lumayas ka, punyeta ka").
• Enraged, Elpidio kicked the door open and saw Salvador Iguiron behind the door holding a rattan stick (arnis), who hit Elpidio twice on the head.
• While wrestling with Salvador for the rattan stick, Titus sprayed something on Elpidio's face, and Elpidio bit Salvador's head to free himself.
• As Elpidio was about to exit, Gary Fantastico hit him on the right side of the head with a tomahawk axe.
• Elpidio walked away but was chased by Gary (with tomahawk), Salvador (with arnis), and Titus.
• Rolando Villanueva suddenly hit Elpidio on the back of the head with a lead pipe, causing him to fall.
• While Elpidio begged for mercy, Salvador hit him countless times on his thighs, legs, and knees with the rattan stick; Gary hit his right leg with the tomahawk causing a fracture; Rolly hit his head with the lead pipe; and Tommy hit his shoulder with a piece of wood.
• The attack only stopped when a bystander fainted; Elpidio pretended to be dead, after which neighbors rushed him to the Philippine General Hospital (PGH).
• Medical examination revealed bilateral leg fractures (one closed fracture from blunt injury, one open fracture from hacking) and multiple lacerations on the head.
• During trial, co-accused Salvador Iguiron died; the RTC acquitted Titus Iguiron, Saligan Iguiron, and Tommy Ballesteros but convicted Gary Fantastico and Rolando Villanueva.

• The conclusions drawn by the CA and RTC from the facts are incorrect.
• The Information is defective for failing to allege all elements of attempted murder, specifically arguing that the phrase "not necessarily mortal" indicates absence of intent to kill.
• Not all elements of attempted murder are present in the case.
• There is no treachery or any other qualifying circumstance present.
• The lower courts failed to consider mitigating circumstances.
• There are manifest mistakes in the findings of facts by the CA and RTC.
• The conviction was based on the weakness of the defense evidence rather than the strength of the prosecution evidence.
• The testimony of respondent Elpidio Malicse, Sr. that petitioners attacked him is uncorroborated and self-serving.

• Procedural:
  • Whether the Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 should be dismissed for raising questions of fact rather than questions of law.
• Substantive Issues:
  • Whether the Information sufficiently alleges the crime of attempted murder under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code.
  • Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of petitioners beyond reasonable doubt.
  • Whether treachery attended the commission of the crime.
  • Whether abuse of superior strength was properly appreciated as a qualifying circumstance.
  • Whether the penalty imposed by the lower courts was correct under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

• Procedural:
  • The petition should be dismissed for failing to comply with Rule 45's requirement that only questions of law may be raised, as petitioners' arguments involve questions of fact (truth or falsity of alleged facts). However, the Court addressed the merits and found the arguments deserve scant consideration.
  • The Court distinguished questions of law (doubt as to what the law is on a certain state of facts) from questions of fact (doubt as to the truth or falsity of alleged facts).
• Substantive:
  • The Information is sufficient as it alleged all elements of attempted murder under Article 6 of the RPC: commencement by overt acts, non-performance of all acts of execution, and non-desistance. The phrase "not necessarily mortal" does not negate the allegation of intent to kill, which can be inferred from the means used, nature of wounds, and conduct of the accused.
  • Conviction affirmed: The victim's positive identification of petitioners as assailants is credible and entitled to greater weight than the petitioners' bare denials. The testimony is corroborated by medico-legal findings confirming the injuries consistent with the weapons used (tomahawk, lead pipe, rattan stick).
  • Treachery is absent: The attack was spontaneous, triggered by the victim's provocative act of kicking the door, negating the deliberate or conscious adoption of means of execution required for treachery.
  • Abuse of superior strength is present: There was a notorious inequality of forces between the armed petitioners (tomahawk, lead pipe, rattan stick) and the unarmed, intoxicated victim. The evidence establishes that the assailants purposely took advantage of this superiority.
  • Penalty modified: For attempted murder, the penalty is prision mayor (two degrees lower than reclusion perpetua for consummated murder). Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the maximum should be within prision mayor (8 years and 1 day to 10 years) and the minimum within prision correccional (6 months and 1 day to 6 years). The proper sentence is six (6) years of prision correccional as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as maximum.

• Attempted Felony under Article 6, Revised Penal Code — Defined as commencing the commission of a felony directly by overt acts without performing all acts of execution due to causes other than spontaneous desistance. An overt act is physical activity indicating intention to commit a crime, more than mere preparation, which if completed would logically ripen into the concrete offense.
• Sufficiency of Information under Section 6, Rule 110 — A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the designation of the offense by statute and the acts or omissions constituting the offense. The failure to move to quash on grounds of insufficiency before plea constitutes waiver under Section 9, Rule 117.
• Positive Identification vs. Denial — Positive identification by a credible prosecution witness of the accused prevails over the accused's bare denial, which is self-serving and cannot obtain greater evidentiary weight.
• Treachery — Requires deliberate adoption of means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime that ensure its execution without risk to the offender arising from the defense the victim might make. The attack must be preconceived and deliberate, not spontaneous.
• Abuse of Superior Strength — Present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and aggressor, deliberately selected or taken advantage of by the aggressor in the commission of the crime. It means purposely using excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked.
• Penalty for Attempted Felonies under Article 51, Revised Penal Code — The penalty for attempted felonies is lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.

• "There is a 'question of law' when the doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on a certain state of facts, and which does not call for an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the parties-litigants. On the other hand, there is a 'question of fact' when the doubt or controversy arises as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts."
• "An overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense."
• "There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution, which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make."
• "Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime."

• People v. Lizada — Cited for the definition of an overt or external act in attempted felonies, requiring physical activity indicating the intention to commit a particular crime that would ripen into a concrete offense if completed.
• Rivera v. People — Cited for the elements of attempted felony and factors to determine intent to kill (means used, nature/location/number of wounds, conduct of malefactors, circumstances and motives).
• People v. Alvarado — Cited for the rule that positive identification of the accused by prosecution witnesses is entitled to greater weight than the accused's denial.
• People v. Daquipil — Cited for the definition of abuse of superior strength as requiring a notorious inequality of forces.
• People v. Casingal — Cited for the requirement that abuse of superior strength must be deliberately sought and taken advantage of, not merely established by numerical superiority.
• People v. Tavas — Cited for the principle that treachery is negated when the attack is spontaneous and not preconceived.

• Article 6, Revised Penal Code — Defines attempted felonies and the elements required for criminal liability in attempted crimes.
• Article 51, Revised Penal Code — Prescribes the penalty for attempted felonies as lower by two degrees than that for consummated felonies.
• Article 248, Revised Penal Code — Defines the crime of Murder, the attempted form of which was charged in the Information.
• Section 1, Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure — Limits petitions for review on certiorari to questions of law.
• Section 6, Rule 110, Rules on Criminal Procedure — Defines the sufficiency of a complaint or information.
• Section 9, Rule 117, Rules of Court — Provides that failure to move to quash on certain grounds before plea constitutes waiver.