G.R. No. 133580 ; July 20, 2001
People of the Philippines, plaintiff and appellee, vs. Maximo Geneblazo, accused-appellant.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging Maximino Geneblazo with Murder for stabbing Domingo Opalsa on January 15, 1988, in Calauag, Quezon. Upon arraignment, he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented Alex Obien, who testified that he and the victim were walking when accused-appellant and companions stoned them. They retaliated but ran upon seeing accused-appellant draw a knife. Accused-appellant caught up and stabbed the victim twice. SPO1 Emmanuel Quiogue testified he witnessed a chase, intervened to separate two men, and was himself accidentally stabbed by the accused-appellant, whom he recognized. The victim was pronounced dead on arrival. The victim’s mother testified on burial expenses. The defense presented only accused-appellant, who claimed self-defense. He testified that the drunk victim and companion challenged him, threw stones, and that the victim drew a knife and wounded him. He wrested the knife and stabbed the victim, and also accidentally stabbed SPO1 Quiogue before fleeing. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of Murder, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and ordered him to pay damages.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of Murder by appreciating the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
2. Whether the trial court erred in not considering the justifying circumstance of self-defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. On the first issue, the Court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove treachery. The attack was not shown to be deliberate and adopted to ensure execution without risk to the assailant, as the initial confrontation involved a stone-throwing incident and a chase, and the mode of attack was not proven to be consciously chosen to facilitate the killing without danger to accused-appellant. On the second issue, the Court ruled that accused-appellant failed to prove self-defense. He admitted the killing, thus bearing the burden to prove unlawful aggression by the victim, reasonable means of defense, and lack of sufficient provocation. The evidence established that unlawful aggression originated from accused-appellant when he and his companions stoned the victims. Even assuming the victim was initially aggressive, such aggression ceased when the victim ran away. Accused-appellant’s pursuit made him the aggressor. His act of stabbing the victim again after disarming him and in the presence of a police officer negated self-defense. His flight was evidence of guilt. However, without treachery, the crime is Homicide, not Murder. The penalty is modified to an indeterminate sentence of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor medium, as minimum, to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal medium, as maximum. Accused-appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of the victim civil indemnity of P50,000.00, actual damages of P5,000.00 (based on the funeral home certification), moral damages of P50,000.00, and costs.