G.R. No. L-48875 October 21, 1982
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Delfin Muit, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The accused, Delfin Muit, a retired PC lieutenant, was convicted of Murder for the killing of Rodolfo Torrero. The victim and the accused’s wife had performed together in a stage play and held barangay positions that required frequent meetings, leading to rumors of an affair that reached the accused. On the afternoon of February 26, 1976, the victim, his family, and a friend were invited by the accused to rest at his house. After other visitors left, the accused confronted Torrero about the rumors and his visits to Mrs. Muit. The victim explained the official nature of their meetings and, to avoid trouble, decided to leave.
As Torrero walked outside, the accused followed, shouted for him to wait, and then drew a .45 caliber pistol. He fired at Torrero, hitting him. A witness, Benigno Gubatan, grabbed the accused from behind, but a second shot was fired, hitting the victim again. As the victim’s wife rushed to him, the accused aimed at her, but Gubatan deflected the third shot upward. The accused later surrendered to authorities. The defense claimed the shooting occurred during a struggle after the victim allegedly drew a knife, but the trial court found the prosecution’s version credible.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused of Murder, and if so, whether any mitigating circumstances attended the commission of the crime.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the penalty. The killing was attended by the qualifying circumstance of treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, as the accused fired at the victim from behind while the latter was walking away, depriving him of any chance to defend himself. The defense of denial and claim of a struggle were rejected for being inconsistent with the physical evidence and the credible testimonies of eyewitnesses.
However, the Court found the presence of two mitigating circumstances: voluntary surrender and passion and obfuscation. The accused surrendered and turned over his firearm soon after the incident. Furthermore, the killing was precipitated by the accused’s belief in the affair between his wife and the victim. The feeling of resentment from such rivalry is a powerful stimulant to jealousy sufficient to produce loss of reason and self-control, constituting the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation. With these two mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances, the penalty was reduced. The accused was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months of reclusion temporal, as maximum.