G.R. No. L-33492 March 30, 1988
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee vs. EFREN MERCADO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution’s evidence established that on the evening of December 23, 1970, the victim Dominador Salvador, Jr., and his friends were on their way to go caroling in Las Piñas. As they passed through an alley, a group including the accused, Efren Mercado, uttered slanderous words and hurled stones at them. The caroling group retreated to repair a damaged guitar. Upon venturing out again, they encountered Mercado’s group waiting for them. Another stoning incident ensued, prompting Salvador and a companion to approach Mercado’s group to inquire why they were being attacked. At this point, eyewitnesses Leonardo Calvento and Emilio Fuerte saw Mercado grab Salvador and deliver a fatal stab wound to his chest. The victim died upon arrival at the hospital.
The accused-appellant admitted to stabbing the deceased but interposed the justifying circumstance of self-defense. He claimed that he was on his way home when he saw a group of twelve persons, including the victim, chasing his two companions. He asserted that this group then attacked him with a chain and a piece of bamboo, forcing him to draw a knife to defend himself. The trial court convicted him of Murder, qualified by treachery, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the accused-appellant has successfully proven his claim of self-defense. A secondary issue is whether the qualifying circumstance of treachery was present to elevate the killing to Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime and the penalty. The Court held that the accused-appellant failed to prove self-defense by clear and convincing evidence. The burden of proof shifts to the accused when invoking self-defense, requiring proof of unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of sufficient provocation. Appellant’s version, based solely on his own testimony, was uncorroborated and deemed insufficient to overthrow the positive and categorical identification by two prosecution eyewitnesses who testified that he was the unlawful aggressor. The claim of flight was also negated by evidence that he was arrested at his nearby house without resistance.
However, the Court found that the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not present. The prosecution evidence showed the killing was preceded by an exchange of hostile acts—slanderous words and stoning—which should have placed the victim on guard. The victim was facing the appellant when stabbed, and the circumstances indicated a sudden, frontal attack, not a mode of execution that deliberately and consciously ensured the assailant’s safety from any defense the victim might make. Absent treachery, the crime committed is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence of eight years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The civil indemnity was increased to P30,000.00.