G.R. No. 216642 September 08, 2020
PO2 BERNARDINO CRUZ Y BASCO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner PO2 Bernardino Cruz y Basco was charged with Homicide for the death of Gerwin Torralba and Frustrated Homicide for the shooting of Archibald Bernardo. The prosecution’s version states that on September 9, 2008, while Bernardo was on his motorcycle, Cruz flagged him down. After a verbal exchange of “Ano?” and “Ano rin,” Cruz drew his gun and fired successive shots at Bernardo, hitting him. During the shooting, a child, Gerwin Torralba, who was flying a kite in the area, was hit by a bullet and died. Cruz fled the scene. The defense version claims Cruz, a policeman on roving patrol, was overtaken and blocked by Bernardo. Cruz recognized Bernardo as the son of a political rival. Bernardo drew his gun and pointed it at Cruz, prompting Cruz to fire in self-defense to repel the aggression. Cruz surrendered to his superiors after the incident. The Regional Trial Court found Cruz guilty of Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide for Torralba’s death and Frustrated Homicide for shooting Bernardo. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s conviction of the petitioner for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Frustrated Homicide, and in not appreciating the justifying circumstances of self-defense and fulfillment of duty or the mitigating circumstances of sufficient provocation and voluntary surrender.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA decision with modifications. The Court held that the justifying circumstance of performance of duty or lawful exercise of right was not applicable. For this defense to prosper, the accused must prove that he acted in the performance of a duty, that the injury caused was the necessary consequence of the due performance of such duty, and that he did not act with culpable disregard of the consequences. The Court found that Cruz failed to prove these elements. His claim that he fired at Bernardo because the latter drew a gun was not credible and was contradicted by prosecution witnesses. The number, location, and severity of Bernardo’s wounds (shot in the back and wrist while fleeing) were inconsistent with a lawful performance of duty or self-defense against an armed aggressor. The mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation was not appreciated as the alleged provocation (Bernardo saying “Ano rin”) was not sufficient to excite the petitioner to commit the crime. Voluntary surrender was not appreciated as the evidence showed Cruz fled the scene, left his motorcycle, and only surrendered later, which did not show a spontaneous acknowledgment of guilt. The Court modified the awards of damages in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.