G.R. No. 28450 , August 8, 1928
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MORO SALAHUDDIN (alias SALA), defendant-appellant.

Ponente: Avanceña, C.J.

FACTS

On September 29, 1926, Moro Aru returned to his house with severe bruises on his head and face. Before he died a few hours later, he informed his wife and two witnesses that while he was at the river, the appellant Salahuddin (Sala) and two others attacked him, with Salahuddin striking him on the forehead. He stated he was going to die and named his attackers. The medical examination confirmed death was due to cerebral hemorrhage from head blows. Prior incidents included a fight where Salahuddin lost a tooth to Aru, and an accusation by Aru’s father-in-law against the other two alleged attackers for theft, suggesting possible motives. Salahuddin was convicted of homicide, while his co-accused were acquitted. On appeal, Salahuddin claimed self-defense, alleging Aru attacked him with a bolo over a field dispute, and he only struck Aru once with a stick in response.

ISSUE

Was the appellant’s claim of self-defense valid to exculpate him from the crime of homicide?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The claim of self-defense was rejected as it was not sufficiently proven and was contradicted by the evidence. The Court found the appellant’s version improbable because: (1) he allegedly dodged a bolo attack yet sustained no injuries; (2) his claim of delivering only one blow was incompatible with the multiple contusions found on both sides of the deceased’s head; and (3) the location and number of wounds could not be explained merely by a fall into shallow water with stones. The dying declaration of the victim, made in the consciousness of impending death, was properly admitted as an ante-mortem statement and sufficiently established the appellant’s participation in the attack. The proven facts constituted the crime of homicide, and the penalty imposed was within the trial court’s discretion.