G.R. No. 115689 June 30, 1997
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LINO ARTIAGA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Lino Artiaga was convicted of Murder by the Regional Trial Court of Tagum, Davao, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The information alleged that on July 9, 1991, in Pantukan, Davao, Artiaga, with treachery and evident premeditation, stabbed Benjamin Serquiña with a kitchen knife, causing his death. The prosecution presented Ernesto Ductama, who testified that on the night of July 9, 1991, after a meeting was not held, he, the victim Serquiña, Pedencio Amante, and Albert Gonzales were walking home along a trail. Artiaga approached from a creek, placed his right arm over Serquiña’s shoulder, thrust a knife into his left breast, and fled. Serquiña died shortly after. Dr. Evangeline D. Hornido confirmed the fatal chest wound. The defense presented Emeterio Geonzon and Artiaga, who claimed self-defense. They testified that they were panning gold in a creek when Serquiña, Amante, and Gonzales arrived. An argument ensued after Serquiña demanded Artiaga hurry his work. Serquiña allegedly picked up a stone and tried to hit Artiaga, who ducked. As Serquiña picked up another stone, Artiaga, claiming he had no retreat, stabbed him. The trial court found the defense version incredible and convicted Artiaga of murder, appreciating the generic aggravating circumstance of nighttime.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in not acquitting accused-appellant Lino Artiaga on the ground of self-defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court MODIFIED the decision of the trial court. It held that accused-appellant failed to prove the elements of self-defense: unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of sufficient provocation. The testimonies of the defense witnesses were inconsistent and incredible. First, there was no credible evidence of unlawful aggression by the victim. Second, even assuming the victim tried to hit Artiaga with a stone, the use of a knife against an unarmed assailant was not a reasonable means of defense. Third, Artiaga was likely the aggressor, as he was armed with a knife at night near the creek, indicating a purpose to waylay the victim. The Court found the crime to be murder qualified by treachery, as the attack was sudden and made in the dark against an unarmed, unsuspecting victim. However, evident premeditation was not proven. Nighttime was absorbed in treachery and could not be separately appreciated as a generic aggravating circumstance. The crime was committed before the effectivity of R.A. No. 7659 . With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. The Court affirmed the conviction for murder qualified by treachery, sentenced Artiaga to reclusion perpetua with accessory penalties, and ordered him to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the amount of P50,000.00.