G.R. No. 127815 . June 9, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. STEPHEN SANTILLANA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Stephen Santillana was charged with murder for stabbing Wilfredo Limpiado to death on October 30, 1994, in Parañaque. The prosecution established that a dispute arose when the victim’s wife, Teresita, confronted Santillana about his installation of a sink, claiming it would obstruct their planned house elevation. The victim, Wilfredo, subsequently emerged and repeatedly asked Santillana’s companion to stop the work. After the third request, Santillana immediately stabbed Wilfredo in the abdomen, causing his death. Santillana then retreated to his house. The police responded to a report, and Santillana was later approached by SPO1 Bernal at the scene. Santillana gave himself up and stated he had discarded the knife, which was subsequently recovered.
The defense, however, claimed self-defense. Santillana testified that during the argument, Wilfredo suddenly punched him, causing him to fall. While on the ground, he saw Wilfredo holding a knife, prompting him to wrestle for it. He allegedly stabbed Wilfredo only in the ensuing struggle to defend himself. He asserted that he then instructed his companion to call the police and peacefully surrendered.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the killing was attended by treachery to qualify as murder, and whether the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender is present.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the conviction from murder to homicide. The legal logic is that treachery requires the deliberate adoption of means of execution that ensure the safety of the assailant from any defense the victim might make. Here, the prosecution evidence showed the attack was frontal and occurred during a heated argument where the victim had already verbally confronted the accused. This suddenness did not constitute treachery, as it was not shown that the mode of attack was consciously adopted to eliminate any risk to the accused from the victim’s retaliation. The crime is therefore homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code.
Regarding voluntary surrender, the Court ruled it was not present. For surrender to be mitigating, it must be spontaneous and indicative of a desire to submit oneself unconditionally to authorities. Santillana’s act of discarding the knife out of fear negated spontaneity. Furthermore, he was merely fetched by the police from his house; his peaceful compliance did not equate to a voluntary surrender, as his arrest was already inevitable. The Court affirmed the civil indemnity and moral damages, with a slight modification to the actual damages. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Santillana was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of eight years and one day of prision mayor as minimum, to fourteen years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal as maximum.