G.R. No. 139530 - People vs. Bautista y Sabado

The case involves the People of the Philippines as the complainant and Pepe Bautista y Sabado as the accused.
The accused was charged in Criminal Case No. 613 with the crime of murder, with the incident dated February 3, 1993, occurring in Barangay Balance, Municipality of Dupax del Norte, Nueva Vizcaya.

A drinking spree was held at the residence of Fausto Polon attended by several individuals, including the victim, Rodolfo Bacoling, and others (such as James Buyagan, Felix Pallay, Lino Menzie, and Renato Hilario).
The victim stayed behind after some companions left, and during this time, appellant and the victim were seen conversing.
At approximately 9 p.m., a neighbor, Lorenzo Dumase, witnessed appellant running after Bacoling, an act which would later be central to the determination of the crime’s nature.

Neighbor Lorenzo Dumase observed the appellant chasing the victim from a distance.
Around midnight, Hilario, a nearby resident, was awakened by appellant and his brother Danilo, who arrived at his house. The accused showed a blood-stained shirt and presented a blood-stained bolo, claiming responsibility for Bacoling’s death.
Subsequently, the bolo was wrapped by Hilario and turned over to the police.
At around 6 a.m. on February 4, 1993, appellant voluntarily confessed the killing to James Buyagan, prompting the latter to notify the authorities.

An autopsy report dated February 9, 1993 by Dr. Mary Ruth C. Reyes determined that the victim died of hemorrhagic shock due to head and neck injuries; the injuries were caused by multiple hacking (incised) wounds.

During the drinking spree, the victim allegedly made disparaging remarks involving appellant’s cousin, Lito Vicente, and mentioned an earlier incident involving the victim’s uncle.
The appellant claimed that after his companions had departed, the victim followed him while continuing to badmouth him.
When the appellant looked back, he contended that the victim unsheathed his bolo and threatened him. In response, the accused grabbed the bolo and asked the victim his purpose.
The victim allegedly picked up a stone and hurled it at the appellant, who dodged it and subsequently responded by striking the victim with his own bolo once the aggression ceased.

The trial court initially found the appellant guilty of murder, emphasizing the element of treachery due to the manner in which the attack was executed (i.e., from behind while the victim was fleeing).
The prosecution’s evidence centered on the uncontradicted chain of events leading to the victim’s death, supported by both eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence.
The appellant challenged this by raising issues regarding the proper qualification of the crime, arguing for murder to be downgraded to homicide on the ground of applicable mitigating circumstances.

Whether the crime committed by Pepe Bautista y Sabado should be qualified as murder or merely as homicide.

The appellants asserted that the evidence did not support the qualification of murder since the essential elements of treachery were not clearly established.
The contention was that the victim’s attempt to flee and his relative awareness of the danger negated the presence of treachery.

Whether mitigating circumstances such as drunkenness, provocation, and unlawful aggression existed to reduce the appellant’s criminal liability.

The appellant argued that his state of intoxication impaired his capacity for judgment.
He further contended that the victim’s provocative behavior and alleged initial aggression warranted a defensive justification.
The appropriateness of applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law in the imposition of the penalty was also questioned.