People vs. Enojo

The killing of a child is qualified by treachery even if the Information alleges only the victim's minority, because the child's tender age renders the victim defenseless. For the frustrated murder of an adult woman, abuse of superior strength qualifies the crime when a man with a deadly weapon attacks an unarmed and defenseless woman, while treachery requires factual averments in the Information and a preconceived mode of attack.

The case involves separate Informations charging Cresenciano Enojo a.k.a. "Olpok" with three counts of murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, for the deaths of Delfred, Alfred, and Chrocila Cuevas, and one count of frustrated murder under the same article in relation to Articles 6 and 50 for the wounding of their mother, Carmen Cuevas. The RTC later noted that R.A. No. 9346, enacted on June 24, 2006, required reducing the death penalty to reclusion perpetua.

Felix Montiil, the victims' neighbor, testified that on November 20, 1999, at about 5:30 in the afternoon, in Sitio Dumanon, Barangay Nasig-id, Zamboanguita, Negros Oriental, he overheard Delfred A. Cuevas, a nine-year-old boy, say that he had hit accused-appellant Cresenciano Enojo's dog with a slingshot. Enojo was passing by and, in a fit of rage, told Delfred that his dog had a big wound on its side, threatened to break Delfred's head, and warned that he would also break the heads of Delfred's parents if the boy told them. Delfred rushed home.

Moments later, Delfred's mother, Carmen Cuevas, came looking for Enojo to confront him about what he had told her son. Enojo emerged and hacked Carmen twice on the head and once on the back, causing her to fall to the ground. Enojo then made his way to Carmen's house, giving Carmen the opportunity to seek Montiil's help. Carmen recounted that after she fell, she heard her children Alfred, six years old, and Chrocila, two years old, calling out to her; she yelled for them to run to their house, but Enojo followed them. Carmen claimed she witnessed Enojo hack Alfred and Chrocila to death. As for Delfred, she maintained that her son almost escaped, but Enojo caught up with him and hacked him on the head twice.

Dr. Clemente Hipe IV, the physician who medically examined Carmen, testified that her injuries were fatal and should have resulted in her death, but did not produce it by reason of a cause independent of the will of the accused: the timely medical attention provided to Carmen.

Accused-appellant denied having hacked to death Carmen's three minor children. He narrated that while plowing his neighbor's field, he heard children crying from a distance, but the sound died down. He continued with his errands and chanced upon Carmen, then armed with a wooden club with clothes drenched in blood. When asked what happened, Carmen angrily retorted that she would break his head if he continued asking her questions. Carmen then attacked and hit him. When the attack continued, accused-appellant swung his bolo, accidentally hitting Carmen on the head. He was surprised for being considered the suspect in the killing of Carmen's three children.

After trial, the RTC found no reason to doubt the prosecution witnesses' credibility after observing their demeanor on the stand, and it rejected accused-appellant's self-defense claim because his version was uncorroborated by any other witness and no medical certificate was presented to prove the alleged injuries. The RTC was convinced that Carmen only saw the killing of Delfred, not Alfred and Chrocila, but found sufficient circumstantial evidence that accused-appellant killed the two other children as well. The CA found the claimed inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses' testimonies trivial and inconsequential.

• Qualifying Circumstances in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: Accused-appellant argued that abuse of superior strength and treachery were not present to qualify the crime against Carmen to frustrated murder.
• Credibility and Identification: Accused-appellant maintained that inconsistencies in Carmen's and Montiil's recollection of the events surrounding the children's attack cast doubts on their credibility and on their identification of him as the assailant.

• Qualifying Circumstances for the Murder of the Children: Whether treachery qualified the killings of Delfred, Alfred, and Chrocila to murder.
• Treachery in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: Whether treachery was present to qualify the attack on Carmen to frustrated murder.
• Abuse of Superior Strength in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: Whether abuse of superior strength qualified the attack on Carmen to frustrated murder.
• Credibility and Identification: Whether inconsistencies in Carmen's and Montiil's testimonies cast doubt on their credibility and identification of accused-appellant as the assailant.

• Qualifying Circumstances for the Murder of the Children: Yes. The killing of a child is characterized by treachery even if the manner of assault is not shown, because the child's tender age renders the victim defenseless; the mere allegation of minority is sufficient to qualify the crime to murder.
• Treachery in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: No. The Information failed to allege factual averments constituting treachery; even assuming sufficiency, Carmen was aware of accused-appellant's hostile intentions and the suddenness of the attack was not preconceived but triggered by infuriation.
• Abuse of Superior Strength in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: Yes. An attack by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes abuse of superior strength, and Carmen was unarmed and without means to fend off accused-appellant's bolo attacks.
• Credibility and Identification: No. The RTC's assessment of the prosecution witnesses' credibility, affirmed by the CA, is given great respect and conclusiveness; trial courts are in the best position to decide credibility issues.

• Qualifying Circumstances for the Murder of the Children: The SC affirmed the conviction for the murders of Delfred, Alfred, and Chrocila. It applied the rule that the killing of a child is characterized by treachery even if the manner of the assault is not shown in the Information, because the weakness of the victim due to tender age results in the absence of any danger to the accused. The mere allegation of the victim's minority is sufficient to qualify the crime to murder. The SC cited People vs. Pantoja for this rule.
• Treachery in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: The SC first held that the Information for frustrated murder against Carmen was insufficient for failure to allege factual averments constituting treachery. It reminded public prosecutors that general allegations of aggravating or qualifying circumstances are not enough; factual averments constituting the offense and the circumstances that may increase liability must be alleged to afford the accused the right to be apprised of the nature and cause of the accusation. Even assuming the Information was sufficient, the SC held that treachery was not present. Treachery requires that the attack be carried out in a swift, deliberate, and unexpected manner to deny the victim any opportunity to defend herself, and that the offender planned the mode of attack to ensure its execution without exposing himself to danger from the victim's retaliation or self-defense. Carmen was aware of accused-appellant's hostile intentions and sought to confront him; the suddenness of the attack was not preconceived and deliberately adopted but was triggered by sudden infuriation from a provocative act of the victim.
• Abuse of Superior Strength in the Frustrated Murder of Carmen: The SC ruled that abuse of superior strength was present and could be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance because it was no longer absorbed by the now nonexistent circumstance of treachery. It applied the rule that an attack made by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes abuse of the superiority afforded by his sex and the weapon used, from which the woman was unable to defend herself. The evidence showed that Carmen was unarmed and without any means to fend off accused-appellant's attacks with his bolo. The SC cited People vs. Corpuz.
• Credibility and Identification: The SC sustained the RTC's assessment of the prosecution witnesses' credibility, which the CA had affirmed. It applied the settled rule that trial courts are in the best position to decide issues of credibility because they hear and see the witnesses and observe their demeanor and manner of testifying under exacting examination, making their assessment far superior to that of appellate tribunals. Accused-appellant's defense, which centered on challenging the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, could not be sustained. The CA also found the claimed inconsistencies trivial and inconsequential.

• Treachery in the Killing of a Child — In the killing of a child, treachery is present even if the manner of assault is not shown in the Information, because the weakness of the victim due to tender age results in the absence of any danger to the accused; the mere allegation of the victim's minority is sufficient to qualify the crime to murder. The SC applied this to the killings of Delfred, Alfred, and Chrocila.
• Treachery — Treachery is present when the attack is carried out in a swift, deliberate, and unexpected manner to deny the victim any opportunity to defend himself or herself; the offender must have planned the mode of attack to ensure execution without exposing himself to danger from the victim's retaliation or self-defense. The SC held it was not present against Carmen because she was aware of the hostile intentions and the suddenness was not preconceived but triggered by infuriation.
• Abuse of Superior Strength — An attack by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes abuse of superiority afforded by his sex and the weapon, from which the woman cannot defend herself. The SC applied this to qualify the attack on Carmen to frustrated murder.
• Sufficiency of Information Alleging Qualifying Circumstances — General allegations of aggravating or qualifying circumstances in the Information are not enough; factual averments constituting the offense and the circumstances that may increase liability must be alleged to afford the accused the right to be apprised of the nature and cause of the accusation. The SC applied this to reject treachery in the frustrated murder charge against Carmen.
• Credibility of Witnesses — Trial courts are in the best position to decide credibility issues because they hear and see the witnesses and observe their demeanor and manner of testifying; their assessment is far superior to that of appellate tribunals and is given great respect and conclusiveness when affirmed by the CA. The SC applied this to uphold the prosecution witnesses' credibility and identification of accused-appellant.

• "The killing of a child is characterized by treachery even if the manner of the assault is not shown in the Information, as the weakness of the victim due to his tender age results in the absence of any danger to the accused." — The SC used this rule to affirm the murder conviction for the three children.
• "It is well to point out that the Information for the crime of frustrated murder committed against Carmen is insufficient for failure to allege factual averments constituting treachery." — The SC held that the Information for frustrated murder could not support treachery as a qualifying circumstance.
• "Treachery is present when the attack was carried out in a swift, deliberate, and unexpected manner, the purpose of which is to deny the victim of any opportunity to defend himself or herself. To sustain a finding of treachery, it must be shown that the offender must have planned the mode of attack to ensure its execution without exposing himself to any danger which may come from the victim's act of retaliation or self-defense." — The SC applied this definition to hold that treachery was not present in the attack on Carmen.
• "In several cases, We consistently held that an attack made by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes the circumstance of abuse of that superiority which his sex and the weapon used in the act afforded him, and from which the woman was unable to defend herself." — The SC relied on this rule to qualify the attack on Carmen to frustrated murder.

• Cruz vs. People, G.R. No. 166441, 08 October 2014, 737 SCRA 567, 580 — Followed for the rule that trial courts' assessment of witness credibility is far superior to that of appellate tribunals.
• People vs. Pantoja, G.R. No. 223114, 29 November 2017, 847 SCRA 300, 318 — Followed for the rule that killing a child is characterized by treachery even if the manner of assault is not shown.
• People vs. Dasmariñas, G.R. No. 203986, 04 October 2017, 842 SCRA 39 — Cited in support of the ruling that the Information for frustrated murder was insufficient for failure to allege factual averments constituting treachery.
• People vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 227013, 17 June 2019 — Followed for the definition and requisites of treachery.
• People vs. Cañaveras, G.R. No. 193839, 27 November 2013, 711 SCRA 1, 12 — Followed for the rule that there is no treachery when the suddenness of the attack was not preconceived but triggered by sudden infuriation from a provocative act of the victim.
• People vs. Corpuz, G.R. No. 215320, 28 February 2018, 856 SCRA 610, 623 — Followed for the rule that an attack by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes abuse of superior strength.

• Article 248, Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 — Defines murder and supplies the qualifying circumstances; the SC used it to qualify the children's killings and the attack on Carmen.
• Article 6, Revised Penal Code — Defines frustrated felony; applied to Carmen because the injuries were fatal but did not cause death due to timely medical assistance independent of accused-appellant's will.
• Article 50, Revised Penal Code — Provides the penalty for frustrated felony; the RTC sentenced accused-appellant under Article 248 in relation to Articles 6 and 50 for the frustrated murder of Carmen.
• R.A. No. 9346 — Required reducing the death penalty to reclusion perpetua; the RTC applied it to the three murder counts.
• Right to be apprised of the nature and cause of the accusation — The SC applied this right in requiring factual averments of qualifying circumstances in the Information, not mere general allegations.