People v Adriano

G.R. No 205228 – July 15, 2015

Topic:
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Rolly Adriano y Samson, Lean Adriano, DenDen, Abba Santiago y Adriano, John
Doe and Peter Doe, and Rolly Adriano y Samson
Case: This is an appeal of the Decision of the CA dated May 30, 2011 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 04028,
which affirmed the Decision of the RTC dated April 7, 2009, convicting accused Rolly Adriano for
the crime of Homicide for the killing of Ofelia Bilanan and the crime of Murder of Danilo Cabies
in people v Rolly Sales

FACTS:
Version of the Prosecution
 March 13, 2007: At around 8am, P01 Gabariles and P02 Santos, in civilan clothes, were
on their way to Camp Olivas, Pampanga, riding a motorcycle along Olongapo-Gapan
National Road. While they were at Brgy. San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, a speeding blue Toyota
Corolla with plate no. WHK 635, heading towards the same direction, overtook them and
the car in front of them, a maroon Honda CRV with plate no. CTL 957
 When the Corolla reached alongside the CRV, the passenger on the front seat of the
Corolla shot the CRV and caused the CRV to swerve and fall in the canal in the road
embankment. 4 armed men suddenly alighted and shot the driver of the CRV, who was
later identified as Cabiedes. A bystander was shot by stray bullet, who was standing near
the road. The 4 men hurried back thereafter and left the crime scene.
 Cabiedes and Bulanan died from fatal gunshot wounds: Cabiedes was pronounced DOA
at the Good Samaritan General Hospital due to 3 gunshot wounds on the left side of his
chest while Bulanan died on the spot after being shot in the head
 During the investigation, the police learned that the Corolla was registered under the
name of Antonio River. Upon inquiry, the latter admitted that he was the owner but
clarified that the car is one of the several cars he owns in his rental business, which he
leased to Adriano. Later that day, Adriano, arrived at Rivera’s shop and the policemen
identified him as of the assailants who alighted from the car. He was arrested and brought
to the PSOG in Cabanatuan
 In examining the crime scene, the Nueva Ecija Provincial Crime Laboratory recovered 1
deformed fired bullet from a .45 caliber and 5 cartridges from a .45 caliber
Version of the Defense:
 March 13, 2007: Adriano testified that at around 6pm he was at his house in Dolores,
Magalang, Pampanga, washing the clothes of his child. After doing laundry, he took his
motorcycle to a repair shop and left it here
o 8am: He went to the house of his friend, Ruben Mallari, to ask for a lighter spring
needed to repair his motorcycle. After having coffee in Mallari’s house, he went
home and brought his child to his mother. On his way, he met his brother-in-law
 Felix Sunga and after leaving at his mother’s house, he watched cockfights, where
he saw his friend Danilo Dizon.
o 2pm: He went home and took a rest, thereafter he picked-up his motor and
proceeded to a store and stayed there
o 5pm: He went back home and received a call from Boyet Garcia, who borrowed
the Corolla from him, which he rented from Rivera
o 8pm: He met with Garcia to get the Corolla back and after dropping Garcia off, he
went to Rivera to return the car, where he was arrested by the police, thrown
inside the trunk, and tortured.
 Other Defense’s witnesses: Lucita Tapnio, Mallari Sunga, and Dizon corroborated with his
testimony.
 When arraigned, Adriano pleaded not guilty. The other accused, Lean, Abba, John Doe,
and Peter Doe remained at large
 During the trial the prosecution presented 8 witnesses: (1) P01 Garabiles, (2) P02 Santos,
(3) Police Inspector Sebastian, (4) SP02 Eduardo, (5) P02 Cabrera, (6) P03 Dela Cruz, (7)
Cabiedes, and (8) Ricky Flores
 Defense’s witnesses: Adriano, Tapiano, Sunga, Mallari, and Dizon
Ruling of the Lower Courts:
 The RTC convicted Adriano and rejected Adriano’s defense of alibi on the ground that it
was not supported by clear and convincing evidence. According to the RTC, his alibi
cannot prevail over the testimonies of credible witnesses, who positively identified
Adriano as one of the perpetrators of the crime
 The RTC gave credence to the testimony of prosecution witnesses, P01 Garabiles and P02
Santos. The RTC determined that the defense failed to show proof that will show show or
indicate that P01 Garabiles and P02 Santos were impelled the improper motives to testify
against Adriano.
 The RTC ordered Adriano to pay the following: P100k as funeral; P60k for food served
during, P12,482 as groceries used and served during the burial; P60k for the parts and
service repair of the CRV
Ruling of the CA:
 Adriano contested the validity of the ruling of the RTC in not appreciating his defense of
alibi, as well as the testimonies of the other defense’s witnesses. The CA rejected his
attempt to becloud the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. According to the CA, the
prosecution witnesses’ positive identification of Adriano, cannot be overcome by minor
inconsistencies.
 On the defense of Alibi, the CA was not convinced because it was not impossible to be
physically present at the crime scene, which less than an hour.
 The petition is denied
ISSUE+HELD:
 WON THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF MURDER
– YES
o In case of Murder, the prosecution must establish the presence of the following
elements: (1) That a person was killed; (2) That the accused killed him; (3) that the
 killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248;
(4) the killing is not parricide or infanticide
o In the case at bar, the prosecution has established the concurrence of the
elements of murder:
 (1) the fact of death of Cabiedes and Bulanan;
 (2) The positive identification of Adriano as one of perpetrators of the
crime; and
 (3) the attendance of treachery as a qualifying aggravating circumstance
and use of firearms and abuse of superior strength as generic aggravating
circumstances
o The present case is a case of murder by ambush. In any ambush, the crime is
carried out to ensure that the victim is killed and at the same time, to eliminate
any risk from any possible defenses. It exemplifies the nature of treachery
o Under paragraph 16 of Art. 14 of the RPC, in order for treachery1 to be properly
appreciated, 2 elements must be preset: (1) the time of the attack, the victim was
not in position to defend himself; and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately
adopted the particular means, methods or forms of attack employed by him.
o In the case at bar, treachery is present as the victims were indeed defenseless at
the time of the attack. The appellant ambushed Cabiedes and fired multiple shots
at his car and then immediately fled, causing the latter to die without retaliation.
o All these circumstances indicate that the orchestrated crime was committed with
the presence of treachery
o We refer back to the settled facts of the case. Bulanan, who was merely a
bystander, was killed by a stray bullet. He was at the wrong place at the wrong
time. Stray bullets, obviously, kill indiscriminately and often without warning.
o Under Art. 4 of the RPC, Criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a
felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.
o In the case of People v Herrera citing People v Hilario, the fact that the accused
killed a person other than their intended victim is of no moment. Evidently,
Adriano’s original intent was to kill Cabiedes. However, during the commission of
the crime, a stray bullet hit and killed Bulanan. The former is responsible for the
consequences of his acts.
o Although Bulanan’s death was by no means deliberate, we shall adhere to the
prevailing jurisprudence pronounced in People v Flora, where the court ruled that
treachery may be appreciated in aberration ictus (Mistake of Blow).

FALLO:
 The appeal is Dismissed. The assailed Decision of the CA is affirmed with modifications.
Appellant Adriano is Guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder for killing Cabiedes,
sentenced to reclusion perpetua, and indemnify the heirs in the amount of 75k civil, 75

1 The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on the
unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any chance to defend himself and thereby ensuring
its commission without risk of himself.
Moral, 30 as exemplary, and 232,482 as actual, and likewise for the death of Bulanan in
the amount of 75k as civil, 75 as moral, 30 as exemplary, and 25 as temperate.