G.R. No. 224498. January 11, 2018.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PFC ENRIQUE REYES, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant PFC Enrique Reyes was charged with Murder for the killing of Danilo Estrella on August 13, 1990, in Manila. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses who testified that Reyes, while in a basketball court, suddenly fired his Armalite rifle at Estrella from behind as the latter was walking home. Reyes then approached the fallen victim, took Estrella’s .38 caliber pistol, fired it upwards, and placed it in Estrella’s hand to simulate a shootout. A medicolegal report confirmed Estrella died from multiple gunshot wounds, and a paraffin test on Estrella was negative for gunpowder nitrates.
Reyes invoked self-defense, claiming he was a police investigator who had received death threats from the victim’s uncle. He testified that on the morning of the incident, he was warned that Estrella and armed companions were planning to kill him. He alleged that upon arriving home, he saw Estrella and four armed men, and that Estrella drew a gun and fired at him first, forcing him to retaliate. The defense presented witnesses to corroborate this narrative.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the trial court’s conviction of the accused-appellant for Homicide, instead of Murder, and whether the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should be appreciated.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Homicide but modified the awarded damages. The Court upheld the rejection of self-defense. When an accused invokes self-defense, the burden of proof shifts to him to establish its elements by clear and convincing evidence. Reyes failed to do so. His claim that the victim fired first was contradicted by the negative paraffin test on the victim’s hands and the credible, consistent testimonies of multiple eyewitnesses who saw a sudden, unprovoked attack from behind. The physical evidence and witness accounts collectively destroyed the theory of an initial aggressive act by the victim.
The Court agreed with the lower courts that the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. While the attack was sudden, the records did not sufficiently establish that the mode of attack was deliberately adopted to ensure the victim’s defenselessness without risk to the assailant. However, the Court found that the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was correctly appreciated. Reyes presented evidence that he did not flee and voluntarily went with responding policemen to the precinct after the incident, which constitutes voluntary surrender. The penalty for Homicide, with one mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance, is thus imposed in its minimum period. Civil indemnity, moral damages, and temperate damages were awarded, with interest on all damages.