GR 113021; (July, 1998) (Digest)
G.R. No. 113021 July 2, 1998
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Romeo Magaro alias “Lolong,” accused-appellee.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Romeo Magaro was convicted of murder by the Regional Trial Court for the killing of Fidel Doria on September 22, 1991. The prosecution’s version states that on the evening of September 22, 1991, Magaro, who was drunk and known to be feared in the community, joined a group including the victim, Fidel Doria, and witness Creston Lingatong for drinks at a store. When Lingatong accidentally spilled liquor, Magaro became angry. Despite apologies and pleas from Lingatong, his wife, and Doria, Magaro remained unmoved, threatened Lingatong, and followed him as he left. Doria followed to avert trouble, pleading with Magaro. Suddenly, Magaro pulled out a bolo and stabbed Doria in the abdomen. Doria was taken to the hospital where he died. Magaro was arrested after fleeing from police; a blood-stained bolo was seized from him, and he admitted to the stabbing. The defense claimed self-defense, alleging that Magaro was assaulted by the group after he refused to buy them liquor, leading to a struggle during which Doria was accidentally stabbed.
ISSUE
The main issue is whether accused-appellant Romeo Magaro acted in self-defense, thereby negating criminal liability for the killing of Fidel Doria.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that accused-appellant failed to prove self-defense. The burden of proving the elements of self-defense (unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of means, and lack of sufficient provocation) shifted to Magaro upon his admission of the killing. The Court found the testimonies of prosecution witnesses credible and upheld the trial court’s assessment. It noted indicia of guilt: Magaro’s flight upon seeing the police, his lack of any injuries contradicting his claim of a struggle, and his failure to claim self-defense upon arrest. However, the Court modified the conviction from murder to homicide, finding that the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not proven, as the meeting was casual and the attack was impulsive. The aggravating circumstance of recidivism, alleged in the information and admitted by Magaro, was considered. Accordingly, Magaro was found guilty of homicide and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of twelve (12) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.