G.R. No. 107874 August 4, 1994
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. George Decena y Rocaberte, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On December 25, 1990, in San Fabian, Pangasinan, accused-appellant George Decena was charged with murder for the death of Jaime Ballesteros. The prosecution’s primary witness was the victim’s 14-year-old daughter, Luzviminda Ballesteros. She testified that around 4:00 P.M., while fetching her intoxicated father who was walking home, she saw appellant rush towards her father with a long bladed weapon. Despite her warning, the victim merely raised his hand and was stabbed on the right chest. Appellant fled, and the victim later died at the hospital. The trial court convicted appellant of murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay indemnity and damages. Appellant claimed self-defense, alleging that the victim initially attacked him with a fork at a basketball court and later with a balisong in front of his house. He also contended that the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should be appreciated.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether appellant acted in complete self-defense, thereby absolving him from criminal liability. A secondary issue is whether the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender is applicable.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. Appellant’s claim of self-defense failed. For self-defense to be valid, unlawful aggression by the victim must be present. The Court found that any initial aggression at the basketball court ceased when a barangay tanod intervened and both parties were advised to go home. The defense failed to prove that the victim persisted in attacking appellant afterward. The Court noted inconsistencies in the defense’s evidence, including appellant’s vacillation between claiming a fork or a knife was used against him, contradictions regarding his whereabouts after the incident, and the unreliable testimony of his alleged eyewitness. The prosecution’s version was deemed more credible. The Court also ruled that voluntary surrender was not mitigating because appellant did not surrender spontaneously; he was located and confronted by police based on a report that he had fled. However, the Court found that the killing was not attended by treachery, as the attack was frontal and the victim was warned. Thus, the crime is homicide, not murder. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity and damages were affirmed.