G.R. No. 129252 ; November 28, 2000
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO CABER, SR., accused-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution’s evidence, primarily through eyewitness Julian Rama, established that on November 20, 1994, in Tacloban City, accused-appellant Francisco Caber, Sr. chased and stabbed Teodolfo Ramirez twice in the chest with a pisao (fan knife), causing his death. Rama testified that Ramirez ran to him for help, but despite his pleas, Caber succeeded in stabbing the victim. The defense, however, presented a different version. Accused-appellant admitted the killing but claimed self-defense. He testified that Ramirez initially attempted to stab him, and he merely parried the blow, turned the knife, and thrust it into Ramirez. He claimed he then chased and stabbed Ramirez again after the victim fled.

ISSUE

The core issues were whether accused-appellant acted in lawful self-defense and, if not, whether the killing constituted murder or the lesser crime of homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court rejected the claim of self-defense. By invoking it, accused-appellant admitted the killing and assumed the burden of proving unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of means, and lack of sufficient provocation. The Court found his testimony uncorroborated and inconsistent with the physical evidence and the credible account of prosecution witness Rama. The claim that the initial aggression came from Ramirez was not proven with clear and convincing evidence. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Rama’s credibility, noting his testimony was straightforward and consistent. However, the Court modified the conviction from murder to homicide. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was not established. The prosecution failed to prove that accused-appellant employed means of execution that deliberately ensured the victim’s defenselessness. The attack occurred during a chase in a residential area, and the victim was not completely helpless, as evidenced by his ability to run and seek aid. The Court appreciated the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, as accused-appellant readily submitted to a barangay tanod after the incident. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court sentenced accused-appellant to an indeterminate penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity of ₱50,000 was affirmed, with an additional award of ₱50,000 in moral damages to the victim’s heirs.