Treachery Must Be Present at the Inception of an Attack to Qualify a Killing as Murder

People of the Philippines v. Eduardo Canillo and Anthony Canillo, G.R. No. 244051, April 28, 2021

In the quiet streets of Bayawan City, a tragic incident unfolded that would later become a pivotal case in Philippine jurisprudence. The murder of Alberto Bohol by Eduardo and Anthony Canillo raised critical questions about the elements of murder, particularly the roles of treachery and superior strength. This case not only affected the lives of those directly involved but also set a precedent for how similar cases might be adjudicated in the future.

The central legal question revolved around whether the killing was qualified by treachery, a circumstance that could elevate the crime from homicide to murder. This case highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of legal qualifications in criminal acts, and how these distinctions can significantly impact the outcome of a trial.

The Legal Framework: Treachery and Superior Strength

In Philippine law, murder is defined under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, which lists several circumstances that can qualify a killing to be classified as murder. Among these, treachery and abuse of superior strength are particularly relevant to the case of Eduardo and Anthony Canillo.

Treachery, or alevosia, is defined under Article 14(16) of the Revised Penal Code as an act committed with means, methods, or forms that ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the offender from any defense the victim might make. The Supreme Court has clarified that for treachery to qualify a killing as murder, it must be present at the inception of the attack, not merely during its continuation.

Abuse of superior strength occurs when there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, and the aggressor deliberately uses this advantage to commit the crime. This circumstance is also listed under Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code.

To illustrate, consider a scenario where a group of armed individuals attacks an unarmed person. If the attack is sudden and the victim is unaware, it might be considered treacherous. However, if the attackers use their numerical advantage and weapons to overpower the victim, it would also constitute an abuse of superior strength.

The Story of Alberto Bohol’s Murder

On the evening of September 3, 2009, Alberto Bohol arrived at the Canillo residence in Bayawan City, driving a trisikad owned by Eduardo Canillo. What followed was a series of events that led to Bohol’s tragic death.

According to eyewitness Eric Estrellanes, Bohol entered the house where he was later heard arguing with Eduardo. The situation escalated, and Bohol ran out of the house, only to be met by Anthony Canillo, who hacked him on the head with a bolo. Eduardo then joined in, hacking Bohol from behind as he fell to the ground.

The defense argued that the killing was not premeditated and that Anthony acted in defense of his father. However, the prosecution maintained that the attack was treacherous and involved the use of superior strength.

The trial court and the Court of Appeals found both Eduardo and Anthony guilty of murder, citing treachery and superior strength as qualifying circumstances. However, the Supreme Court disagreed on the issue of treachery, stating:

"For treachery to be appreciated, it must exist at the inception of the attack, and if absent and the attack continues, even if present at the subsequent stage, treachery is not a qualifying or generic aggravating circumstance."

Despite rejecting the claim of treachery, the Supreme Court upheld the murder conviction based on the use of superior strength, as evidenced by the coordinated attack by Eduardo and Anthony:

"The prosecution was able to show the notorious inequality of forces, as it proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused-appellants used their combined strength and weapons to corner Bohol and then hack him to death."

The procedural journey of this case saw it move from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals, and finally to the Supreme Court, where the nuances of the law were meticulously examined.

Practical Implications and Key Lessons

The ruling in this case has significant implications for how similar cases might be handled in the future. It underscores the importance of proving treachery at the inception of an attack, not merely during its continuation. This distinction can be crucial in determining whether a crime is classified as murder or homicide.

For individuals and legal practitioners, this case serves as a reminder of the need to thoroughly document and present evidence of the circumstances surrounding a crime. It also highlights the importance of understanding the legal definitions and applications of qualifying circumstances like treachery and superior strength.

Key Lessons:

• Ensure that evidence of treachery is clearly established at the start of an attack to qualify a killing as murder.
• Recognize the significance of superior strength as a qualifying circumstance in murder cases.
• Understand the procedural requirements and the importance of appellate review in refining legal interpretations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is treachery in Philippine law?

Treachery, or alevosia, is when an offender commits a crime using means that ensure its execution without risk from the victim’s defense. It must be present at the start of the attack to qualify a killing as murder.

How does abuse of superior strength differ from treachery?

Abuse of superior strength involves using a notorious inequality of forces to commit a crime, while treachery focuses on the method of attack to ensure the victim cannot defend themselves.

Can a crime be considered murder without treachery?

Yes, a crime can be classified as murder if other qualifying circumstances, such as abuse of superior strength, are proven.

What should defense attorneys focus on in murder cases?

Defense attorneys should focus on challenging the evidence of qualifying circumstances like treachery and superior strength, and ensuring that procedural steps are followed correctly.

How can this ruling affect future murder cases?

This ruling may lead to more scrutiny on the timing and nature of attacks in determining whether treachery qualifies a killing as murder, potentially affecting sentencing and legal strategies.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law and appellate practice. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.