G.R. No. 74294 -96 August 4, 1993
People of the Philippines vs. Roger Llabres y Advincula

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Roger Llabres y Advincula, a security guard, was charged with Murder, Frustrated Homicide, and Attempted Homicide. The prosecution evidence established that on August 23, 1984, a group including Roland Yap, Enrique Paras, Santos Origenes, and Victor Lim went to the closed Egg and Eye Restaurant. Llabres refused them entry, leading to a heated argument. The group left and waited at a nearby shed. After about five minutes, Llabres emerged, shouted an expletive, and suddenly attacked Yap with a bolo, hacking him repeatedly even after he fell. When Paras intervened, Llabres wounded him. Llabres also attacked Origenes. Lim was hit when other men from the restaurant joined, causing the group to flee. Yap died from 21 wounds. Paras suffered near-fatal wounds, and Origenes and Lim were injured. Llabres surrendered and admitted the hacking. He invoked self-defense, claiming Yap’s group, armed with bolos, attacked him first after a prior dispute over a bill, and he wrestled a bolo from Yap to defend himself.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly rejected the accused-appellant’s plea of self-defense and convicted him of the crimes charged.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties and damages. The plea of self-defense failed. The accused admitted the act, thus bearing the burden to prove the justifying circumstances of unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of means, and lack of sufficient provocation. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of credibility, favoring the prosecution witnesses. The appellant’s version—that he single-handedly repulsed eight armed attackers—was deemed improbable and uncorroborated. Even assuming unlawful aggression, the means employed were not reasonably necessary, as evidenced by the excessive number of wounds (21) inflicted on Yap, including continued hacking while the victim was defenseless. Treachery was correctly appreciated for the murder due to the sudden attack from behind. The aggravating circumstance of cruelty was incorrectly applied. The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was present in all three cases. The penalties were modified accordingly: for Murder, an indeterminate sentence of 10 years and 6 months of prision mayor to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal; for Frustrated Homicide, 2 years and 4 months of prision correccional to 6 years and 4 months of prision mayor; for Attempted Homicide, 2 months of arresto mayor to 1 year and 2 months of prision correccional. Compensatory damages for the murder were reduced to P50,000.00.