G.R. No. 207818, July 23, 2014
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Alex De Los Santos, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Alex De Los Santos was charged with Murder for killing his brother-in-law, Fernando A. Catriz, on April 6, 2004, in Tuao, Cagayan. The prosecution presented eyewitness Reynaldo Bayudan, the victim’s nephew, who testified that while he and Catriz were unloading chickens, the accused-appellant suddenly appeared behind Catriz and hacked him on the right shoulder with a “tabas” (long bolo). After the bolo’s handle dislodged, the accused-appellant pursued Catriz with a “Rambo-type” knife, repeatedly stabbing him even as Catriz knelt and pleaded for his life. The accused-appellant then exclaimed, “Happy New Year, natayen ni Ferdie!” and washed his hands at a nearby pump well. Dr. Exuperio Yuaga, who conducted the post-mortem examination, confirmed Catriz sustained 11 stab wounds and one incised wound, with the cause of death being hypovolemic shock. The defense, anchored on self-defense, claimed that during a prior drinking session, Catriz had slapped the accused-appellant after a disagreement over tilling a family lot. On the day of the incident, the accused-appellant alleged that when he offered to help Catriz, he was pushed away, and Catriz attempted to hack him with a bolo. The accused-appellant claimed he then grabbed a knife from a nearby house and stabbed Catriz in defense. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted the accused-appellant of Murder, finding treachery present as the initial attack was from behind and the victim was helpless while pleading. The RTC rejected the self-defense claim, noting the accused-appellant failed to raise it immediately upon surrender, the number and seriousness of the wounds indicated a determined effort to kill, and he did not surrender the weapon. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court gravely erred in not giving credence to the accused-appellant’s claim of self-defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the accused-appellant failed to prove the essential element of unlawful aggression on the part of the victim. Unlawful aggression is the primordial requisite for self-defense, and it must be real, immediate, and put the defender’s life in actual danger. The physical evidence, particularly the incised wound on the victim’s left scapula, corroborated the prosecution eyewitness’s account that the initial attack was a hacking blow from behind, not an act of defense. The accused-appellant’s version was deemed unreliable and contradictory. Furthermore, the number, location, and severity of the wounds inflicted (11 stab wounds, including four near the heart) were inconsistent with a mere act of repelling an attack and indicated a determined effort to kill. The Court also upheld the finding of treachery (alevosia), as the mode of attack ensured the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed. The Court modified the awarded damages, increasing civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages to ₱75,000.00 each and awarding ₱75,000.00 as temperate damages, all with 6% interest per annum from finality until fully paid.