G.R. No. L-40757 January 24, 1983
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RICARTE MACARIOLA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution established that on September 21, 1971, inside the New Bilibid Prisons, accused-appellant Ricarte Macariola, a prisoner, stabbed fellow inmate Romeo de la Peña to death. Multiple eyewitnesses, fellow prisoners, testified that Macariola suddenly approached the victim, who was standing in his cell, and stabbed him with an improvised weapon called a “matalas.” The victim fled but was pursued and stabbed again inside a “kubol.” The autopsy revealed sixteen stab wounds, with two being fatal. Prison guard Fernando Gomez witnessed Macariola bending over the victim with a bloodied knife, and Macariola surrendered the weapon to another guard.
The defense, admitting the killing, interposed self-defense. Macariola testified that he and the victim had been gambling, and after he won, the victim snatched the money and kicked him. Fearing the victim would retrieve his own weapon, Macariola stabbed him. He claimed the victim was taller, huskier, and a boxer. Another inmate corroborated that the victim initiated the aggression by kicking Macariola.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted Macariola of Murder qualified by treachery, or if the killing constituted Homicide, possibly mitigated by circumstances.

RULING

The Supreme Court, with a dissenting opinion noted, affirmed the Murder conviction and the imposition of the death penalty. The Court rejected the claim of self-defense. The nature, number, and location of the sixteen stab wounds, including fatal wounds to the heart and lung, were grossly disproportionate to the alleged unlawful aggression of a single kick, negating the requisite necessity and reasonable means of defense. The claim that the victim was about to arm himself was unconvincing given the sudden and violent attack launched by Macariola.
The Court upheld the finding of treachery (alevosia). The attack was sudden and unexpected, ensuring the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. The initial stabbing occurred while the victim was merely standing in his cell. The pursuit and subsequent stabbing inside the “kubol” while the victim was prostrate further demonstrated the deliberate adoption of means to ensure execution without risk to the assailant. The special aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism, as Macariola committed a felony while serving sentence, was also properly appreciated. The penalty was thus correctly imposed at death. A dissenting opinion argued the crime was only Homicide, as the face-to-face altercation arising from a gambling dispute negated treachery.