G.R. No. L-20555 and L-21449 June 30, 1967
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ZOILO CASTRO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On November 29, 1952, in barrio Sto. Niño, San Fernando, Pampanga, an altercation occurred between Donaciano Vitug and Alfredo Briones. Zoilo Castro, Briones’ companion and a policeman off-duty, intervened. The deceased Moises Gomez, a barrio lieutenant, arrived and tried to pacify Castro. As Gomez raised his hands and said they would not fight, Castro called him a “son of a harlot,” pulled out his gun, and shot Gomez in the head, killing him. When Candido Vitug came out of the house, Castro also shot and wounded him. Donaciano Vitug hit Castro with a stone, grappled for the gun, and Castro eventually fled. Separate informations for the murder of Gomez and the frustrated murder of Candido Vitug were filed against Castro. The trial court convicted him of murder and attempted murder. Castro appealed, claiming self-defense, alleging he was hit on the head first and shot because he believed he was about to be killed.

ISSUE

The main issues were the credibility of the conflicting testimonies and the proper classification and penalty for the offenses, specifically whether treachery was present and whether the shooting of Candido Vitug constituted frustrated or attempted murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties. It upheld the trial court’s findings on credibility, giving weight to its assessment of witnesses. The Court found that Castro shot Gomez while the latter was defenseless, with his hands raised, which constituted treachery, qualifying the crime as murder. For the murder conviction, considering the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, the penalty was reduced to an indeterminate sentence of 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum to 17 years, 4 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. For the shooting of Candido Vitug, due to conflicting medical testimony on the fatality of the wounds, the doubt was resolved in favor of the accused, and the crime was held to be attempted murder, not frustrated murder. The penalty was corrected to an indeterminate sentence of 4 months and 20 days of arresto mayor as minimum to 4 years, 2 months and 1 day of prision correccional as maximum. The Court disregarded affidavits of desistance executed by some prosecution witnesses after a proposed monetary settlement, noting that criminal cases are not subject to compromise.