G.R. No. 181204 ; November 28, 2011
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. EDGAR CONCILLADO, Appellant.

FACTS

On August 24, 2002, in Barangay Guinciaman, San Miguel, Leyte, Diosdado Pido was killed, sustaining 26 wounds from gunshot, stabbing, and hacking. Accused of murder were Edgar Concillado, Erlito Concillado, and Dolores Concillado. The prosecution presented Lorenzo Viñas, who testified that in the early morning of August 24, 2002, after he and the victim parted ways, he saw from about 10 meters away Edgar shoot Diosdado with a homemade gun (“surit”). When Diosdado fell, Edgar and Dolores approached and stabbed him with small bolos, after which Erlito joined and hacked the victim with a long bolo. The accused then fled. The prosecution also presented the victim’s sister, Balbina Aureo, regarding burial expenses. The defense of the accused, Edgar Concillado, was self-defense. He admitted inflicting all 26 wounds on the victim but claimed that shortly after 11:00 p.m. on August 23, 2002, after a drinking spree, Diosdado suddenly appeared and challenged him to a fight, hacking him on the right chest. Edgar ran, grabbed a long bolo from his house, and fought back, killing Diosdado. He then surrendered to the police. The defense presented medical testimony that Edgar suffered three superficial incised wounds and police testimony regarding his surrender.

ISSUE

Whether the accused, Edgar Concillado, has successfully proven the justifying circumstance of self-defense to exculpate him from criminal liability for the killing of Diosdado Pido.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court sustained the conviction of Edgar Concillado for Murder. When an accused admits the killing but invokes self-defense, the burden of proof shifts to him to establish by clear and convincing evidence the elements of unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of sufficient provocation. The accused miserably failed to discharge this burden. His claim of self-defense is inherently incredible and irreconcilable with the physical evidence. The victim suffered 26 wounds, including gunshot wounds, multiple stab wounds, and hacking wounds, indicating a determined effort to kill and not an act of defense. The nature, number, and location of the wounds negate the accused’s claim that he merely defended himself against an initial attack. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, favoring the prosecution eyewitness account over the accused’s version, is accorded great respect. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was sufficiently proven, as the attack with a gun ensured the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. The Court affirmed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages, with modifications to the interest rate. The appeal was dismissed.