G.R. No. 146687 , August 22, 2002
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Bonnie R. Rabanal, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Bonnie R. Rabanal, a security guard, was charged with Murder for fatally shooting Roberto Pascua, a security coordinator, in the early dawn of August 11, 1996, in Dagupan City. The prosecution’s witness, security guard Freddie Soriano, testified that he saw accused-appellant repeatedly shoot the victim at close range, fire another shot after the victim fell, take the victim’s gun, and flee. The victim suffered four fatal gunshot wounds to the chest. Accused-appellant pleaded self-defense, claiming that the victim, who was armed and drunk, approached him, kicked his podium, demanded money, drew his firearm, and threatened to kill him. Accused-appellant alleged that while the victim was reaching for his holster, he pushed the victim, grabbed the victim’s gun, drew his own pistol, and fired four times. He then took the victim’s gun and surrendered it and himself to authorities at Camp Crame. The Regional Trial Court convicted accused-appellant of Murder, qualified by treachery and aggravated by cruelty, and sentenced him to death.

ISSUE

The primary issues are: (1) whether accused-appellant’s plea of self-defense is valid; (2) whether the killing was attended by treachery; (3) whether the aggravating circumstance of cruelty was present; (4) whether the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should be appreciated; and (5) whether the damages awarded were proper.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty and damages. On the first issue, the Court rejected the plea of self-defense. For self-defense to prosper, unlawful aggression by the victim must be proven. The evidence showed that the victim had laid down his gun on a concrete porch before being shot, meaning the unlawful aggression had ceased. Accused-appellant, who was younger, sober, and taller than the intoxicated and unarmed victim, became the aggressor when he fired multiple shots. The nature and number of wounds—four fatal gunshot wounds at close range—disproved a mere act of defense and indicated a determined effort to kill.
On the second issue, the Court found that treachery was not present. The attack was not sudden and from behind; it was a face-to-face confrontation where the victim was aware of the aggression. The means employed did not ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the accused.
On the third issue, the Court ruled that cruelty was not proven. Cruelty requires that the accused deliberately and inhumanly augmented the victim’s suffering. The four fatal wounds, inflicted in rapid succession, did not by themselves prove that the accused intended to prolong physical pain.
On the fourth issue, the Court held that voluntary surrender was not a mitigating circumstance. Accused-appellant surrendered at Camp Crame, not to the authorities in Dagupan City where the crime was committed, and did not acknowledge his guilt.
On the fifth issue, the Court modified the damages. It affirmed the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity but reduced the actual damages to P40,000.00, supported by receipts. The award for loss of earning capacity was deleted for lack of sufficient basis. Moral damages were increased to P50,000.00. The award for the coffin and tomb was subsumed under actual damages.
The Supreme Court found accused-appellant guilty of Murder, but without any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua, in accordance with the prevailing law. The firearms were ordered confiscated.