G.R. No. 211159 - People vs. Oloverio

On October 2, 2003, at approximately 2:00–3:00 p.m. in Brgy. Belen, Palompon, Leyte, accused-appellant Marcelino Oloverio allegedly encountered the victim, Rodulfo Gulane, while the latter was walking alone.
Eyewitnesses, Rudipico Pogay and Dominador Panday, testified that Oloverio tapped Gulane’s shoulder and proceeded to stab him repeatedly with a bolo, causing multiple fatal wounds.
After the stabbing, Oloverio reportedly shouted, “Patay na ang datu sa Brgy. San Pablo!” and was later seen surrendering to the authorities accompanied by a barangay tanod.

The Information charged Oloverio with murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, emphasizing the use of treachery in carrying out the crime.
Evidence included eyewitness identifications, testimony on the manner of the stabbing (multiple wounds on the chest and extremities), and references to the victim’s inability to defend himself, partially attributed to his advanced age (83 years old).
The prosecution contended that no prior altercation immediately preceded the attack, and that Gulane was unsuspecting when attacked from behind, supporting the element of treachery.

Oloverio claimed that Gulane had previously insulted him by accusing him of having an incestuous relationship with his mother.
He alleged that repeated insults and a previous altercation gradually built up his anger, ultimately motivating his act when he could “no longer bear the insulting remarks.”
The defense introduced the mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation, arguing that the provocation (through ongoing insults over time) led to a loss of self-control, and also asserted that his voluntary surrender should further reduce his liability.

The trial court, on January 29, 2010 (RTC Decision, Branch 17 of Palompon, Leyte), found Oloverio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, imposing a sentence of reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay civil indemnity and damages.
The Court of Appeals (Decision dated January 29, 2013) affirmed the trial court’s conviction but rejected the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, maintaining that treachery was present and noting only the voluntary surrender as mitigating.
The case was elevated to the Supreme Court (Second Division, GR No. 211159, March 18, 2015), which ultimately modified the previous rulings by reducing the conviction from murder to homicide, recognizing the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation in addition to the voluntary surrender.

Whether the evidence sufficiently establishes treachery to warrant a conviction for murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code.
Whether the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation is applicable given the nature and timing of the provocation by the victim’s repeated insults.
Whether an altercation occurred immediately before the stabbing, which would affect the applicability of passion and obfuscation.
Whether the voluntary surrender by Oloverio qualifies as a mitigating circumstance and should mitigate the imposition of a harsh penalty.
How to properly adjust the penalty and damages considering the presence of mitigating circumstances and the correct classification of the crime (murder vs. homicide).