PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs.
SAMUEL ANOD, Appellant
G.R. No. 186420 / August 25, 2009
Facts:
On May 16, 1997, at Bislig, Surigao del Sur, Samuel Anod and Lionel Lumbayan stabbed and hacked
to death Erlando Costan with a pointed bolo, to the damage and prejudice of the heirs of the said
Costan. The RTC found Anod and Lumbayan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder and
sentenced them reclusion perpetua and to pay the widow of Costan damages. Appellant assailed
RTC’s decision and argues that the act was against his will and done under the compulsion of an
irresistible force and uncontrollable fear for his life. Moreover, appellant contends that the qualifying
circumstances of evident premeditation and treachery were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The CA affirmed RTC’s decision with modification, imposing reclusion perpetua without eligibility for
parole and ordered him to pay heirs of Costan civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages,
and actual damages.
Issue:
1. Whether CA erred in not considering the exempting circumstances for irresistible force and
uncontrollable fear?
2. Whether CA erred in appreciating treachery and evident premeditation as qualifying
circumstances?
Ruling:
1. No. Based on the evidence on record, appellant had the chance to escape Lumbayan's threat or
engage Lumbayan in combat, as appellant was also holding a knife at the time. Thus, appellant's
allegation of fear or duress is untenable. In order for the circumstance of uncontrollable fear may
apply, it is necessary that the compulsion be of such a character as to leave no opportunity for
escape or self-defense in equal combat. Therefore, under the circumstances, appellant’s alleged fear
would not suffice to exempt him from incurring criminal liability.
2. No. Here, appellant tied Costan while the latter was lying down before he and Lumbayan stabbed
the latter to death; thus, ensuring the execution of the crime without risk to themselves. Obviously,
Costan could not flee for his life or retaliate. This aggravating circumstance qualifies the crime to
murder. SC affirmed CA decision with modification that the award of civil indemnity was reduced.
