G.R. No. 96288 March 20, 1995
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RICARDO NEMERIA y Dagopan alias “Nick,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Ricardo Nemeria was charged with Murder for hacking Alberto Cadayuna to death with a bolo on December 8, 1988, in Ayungon, Negros Oriental. Upon arraignment, he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Henry Montelibano and Lorimer Devero, who testified that while walking home from a fiesta, they saw appellant, who was walking behind their group with an unsheathed bolo, suddenly and without warning attack Cadayuna from behind and continue hacking him. The victim was unarmed. Dr. Fe Herrera conducted an autopsy, confirming the multiple fatal hack wounds and noting no trace of alcohol on the victim’s body. The defense interposed self-defense, with appellant claiming that Cadayuna, who had a prior altercation with appellant’s son earlier that day, aggressively advanced towards him while holding stones, prompting appellant to hack him in response. The trial court rejected the defense, convicted appellant of Murder qualified by treachery, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in rejecting appellant’s claim of self-defense.
2. Whether the qualifying circumstances of evident premeditation and treachery were sufficiently proven to convict appellant of Murder.

RULING

1. On Self-Defense: The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s rejection of the plea of self-defense. Appellant failed to prove the essential elements, particularly the reasonable necessity of the means employed. The nature, number, and severity of the victim’s wounds, contrasted with the absence of any injury on appellant, negated the claim of self-defense and indicated a determined effort to kill.
2. On Qualifying Circumstances: The Court modified the conviction. Evident premeditation was not proven, as the incident happened suddenly, likely triggered by a prior fistfight between appellant and the victim’s son. Treachery (alevosia) was also not established. The attack occurred at dusk when visibility was still sufficient; the victim was not completely unaware as he had earlier shouted a warning; and the crime was committed in the presence of others who could have potentially aided the victim. Treachery must be proven as conclusively as the crime itself, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the accused.
Dispositive Ruling: The crime committed is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was appreciated in appellant’s favor. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, appellant is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor, as minimum, to 13 years, 9 months, and 10 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity to the victim’s heirs is increased to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).