Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Alawig
Case
G.R. No. 187731
Decision Date
Sep 18, 2013
Police officer shot dead by colleagues in 1996; conspiracy, treachery proven; appellant convicted of murder, sentenced to reclusion perpetua without parole.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 187731)

Factual Antecedents

SPO1 Alfredo Alawig and several other police officers were charged initially with homicide for the killing of PO3 Cafe, which later changed to murder after a reinvestigation prompted by the victim’s mother, Percelita Cafe. An Amended Information was filed against Alawig and other accused, detailing premeditated and treacherous intent to kill the victim on November 30, 1996, while they were on duty as members of the Philippine National Police (PNP).

Proceedings in the Regional Trial Court

During the corresponding court proceedings, the prosecution presented witnesses who testified about the events leading to Cafe's death. Significant testimonies included observations made by friends and colleagues of the victim, and medical findings from forensic examinations confirming multiple gunshot wounds. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruled on May 17, 2005, finding Alawig and another officer guilty of murder, sentencing them to death, citing treachery and evident premeditation as qualifying circumstances.

Court of Appeals Ruling

SPO2 Dabu, a co-accused, did not appear for the decision's promulgation and subsequently appealed the RTC ruling. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s findings on November 3, 2008, but lowered the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua, while maintaining the conviction for murder.

Issues Raised on Appeal

On appeal, Alawig contended that the CA erred in several respects, including the purported confirmation of self-defense, acceptance of circumstantial evidence, and the handling of qualifying circumstances such as treachery and evident premeditation. He argued that the trial court failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Self-Defense and Circumstantial Evidence

Alawig claimed the burden of proving self-defense was improperly placed upon him, although the CA clarified that he was the only witness who testified on the circumstances surrounding the victim's death. The collective circumstantial evidence presented, including the presence of gunpowder nitrates on Alawig, demonstrated his involvement in the crime, contradicting his narrative that he was a mere bystander.

Finding of Conspiracy

The CA upheld the determination that a conspiracy existed among the accused to commit murder. Evidence reflected a shared design and concerted effort, including trial inconsistencies in the police log entries, which suggested collusion to mislead the investigation regarding the victim’s death.

Treachery and Aggravating Circumstances

The CA confirmed that treachery was a characteristic of the killing, as the nature of the attack indicated a calculated approach by the assailants, preventing the victim from defending himself. The medical evidence corroborated findings that exhibited the victim’s vulnerabilities at the time of the assault.

Conclusion on Evident Premeditation and Flight

The court detailed that evident premeditation lacked sufficient clear evidence, primarily focusing on the noted conspiracy as part of the prosecution’s case. The trial court’s assessment of flight as a non-issue for Alawig was addressed, affirming that a lack of flight does not equate to innocence.

The Crime Committed and Liability

Ult

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.