PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARSENIO FERRERA y BAUTISTA, accused-appellant; G.R. No. L-66965 June 18, 1987

Deceased was beaten, stabbed, and gunshot; chopped, his ear placed inside a bottle; cadaver burned to conceal the crime. Motive irrelevant because accused was positively identified

TOPIC: MOTIVE

RATIONALE: Motive is essential to conviction in murder cases only when there is doubt as to the Identity of the culprit, not when the accused has been positively Identified as the assailant.

CRIME: murder with qualified treachery

Convicted: ARSENIO FERRERA

Victim: Pascual Patiag

FACTS: 

1. December 9, 1982: 4 men boarded victim Pascual's "motorela." When they reached Civilian Home Defense Force (CHDF) headquarters of Barangay Mabuhay, Arsenio Ferrera, Barangay Captain and CHDF head (Commander), together with some CHDF men, stopped the "motorela " and ordered driver Pascual Patiag, to alight even as one of the CHDF men accused him of being a member and/or symphatizer of the New People's Army (NPA). 

2. They led him to CHDF headquarters and took turns in punching him. Perhaps unsatisfied, Arsenio Ferrera stabbed Pascual in his stomach.

3. Victim staggered to his house which is 200m away. Arsenio, lusting for more, and his companions tailing him, shot the fleeing victim twice with a carbine. They continued to slice his dead body then attempted to burn him to conceal the crime.

4. There were 4 eyewitnesses: 

Reynaldo Patiag - victim's son

Oscar Cerdenola - saw the mauling, stabbing, and shooting

Lorenzo Cerdenola - saw the victim being chased and shot

Honorato M. Domingo - who heard when his tricycle was hired, that Ferrera and his men took a bottle containing Pascual's ear

5. RTC convicted Ferrera of murder.

ISSUE: 

W/N appellant Ferrara is guilty of murder qualified by treachery beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING:

YES. He is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. 3 witnesses positively identified him as the perpetrator. The contention that there is no motive is untenable since motive is essential to conviction in murder cases only when there is doubt as to the Identity of the culprit, not when the accused has been positively Identified as the assailant.