GR 140557; (December, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 140557-58; December 5, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDGARDO HERRERA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On the evening of May 29, 1996, in Pasay City, Enrique Ganan was seated outside his home, eating and cuddling his child. Accused-appellant Edgardo Herrera, a police officer, approached Ganan from behind, placed a hand on his shoulder, and without warning, shot him at close range with a .38 caliber revolver. Although wounded, Ganan passed his child to his brother and attempted to crawl to safety. Herrera pursued him and fired several more shots, killing him. A stray bullet also fatally struck a neighbor, Corazon Cajipo, who was chatting nearby. Herrera was charged with Murder for Ganan’s death and Homicide for Cajipo’s death. The trial court convicted him of both crimes, appreciating treachery and the aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of public position, and imposed the death penalty for Murder.
ISSUE
The core issues are whether the killing of Enrique Ganan was attended by treachery, whether the aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of public position was correctly appreciated, and whether Herrera’s claim of self-defense is credible.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties. Treachery was correctly established. The attack was sudden and from behind, ensuring that the unarmed and unsuspecting victim, who was holding a child, had no opportunity to defend himself. The mode of execution deliberately and directly ensured the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. The claim of self-defense was rejected for being inherently improbable and unsupported by evidence, as the victim was indisputably unarmed and in a non-confrontational posture. However, the Court held that the aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of public position was not proven. Mere membership in the police force is insufficient; it must be shown that the accused used his position to facilitate the crime or to intimidate the victim. The prosecution failed to present evidence that Herrera used his official capacity to commit the crimes. Consequently, the death penalty for Murder was reduced to reclusion perpetua, as treachery alone qualifies the killing but no other aggravating circumstance was present to justify capital punishment. The penalty for Homicide was also adjusted accordingly. The Court upheld the awards of civil indemnity and damages to the victims’ heirs.