G.R. NO. 165483: September 12 2006: 533 Phil. 169
Offense Involved: Homicide (Article 249, RPC)
FACTS: On January 16, 1998, brothers Servillano, Melton and Michael Ferrer were having their drinking spree at their house in Poblacion, Manaoag, Pangasinan but later decided to proceed to Tidbits Videoke Bar to continue their drinking spree and to sing. Thereafter, Jaime Palaganas arrived together with Ferdinand Palaganas and Virgilio Bautista. When Jaime Palaganas was singing, “My Way”, Melton sang along. But, Jaime resented this, approached the brother and said in Pangasinan dialect “As if you are tough guys. You are already insulting me in that way.” Jaime struck Servillano’s head with the microphone and a fight ensued. Ferdinand sought help from Rujjeric Palaganas. They went to the bar and upon seeing the Ferrers instructed Rujjeric to shoot them. Rujjeric Palaganas shot Servillano, Melton and Michael with the use of unlicensed firearm. As a result, Melton was killed, Servillano was fatally wounded and Michael was shot in his right shoulder. The police came and took the Ferrer brothers to Manaoag Hospital and later to Villaflor Hospital in Dagupan. Informations were filed for homicide. frustrated homicide and COMELEC Resolution No. 2958 in relation to Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code. Uppon arraignment, Rujjeric and Ferdinand entered separate pleas of “Not Guilty”. The RTC found Rujjeric guilty of the crime of Homicide and 2 counts of Frustrated Homicide but acquitted of the charge of Violation of COMELEC Resolution No. 2958 in relation to Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code while Ferdinand was acquitted of all the charges against him. The case was appealed, but the CA affirmed the decision of the lower court. Hence, this case.
- Whether or not Court of Appeals erred in not acquitting accused-appellant on the ground of lawful self- defense.
- Whether or not Court of Appeals erred in sustaining accused-appelant’s conviction despite the prosecution’s failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt?
- No. Court of Appeals did not err in not acquitting accused-appellant on the ground of lawful self- defense. The elements and/or requisites in order that a plea of self-defense may be validly considered in absolving a person from criminal liability were not present in this case. It is clear that there was no unlawful aggression on the part of the Ferrer brothers that justified the act of petitioner in shooting them. There were no actual or imminent danger to the lives of petitioner and Ferdinand when they proceeded and arrived at the videoke bar and saw thereat the Ferrer brothers. the petitioner’s act of shooting the Ferrer brothers was not a reasonable and necessary means of repelling the aggression allegedly initiated by the Ferrer brothers. As aptly stated by the trial court, petitioner’s gun was far deadlier compared to the stones thrown by the Ferrer brothers.
- No. Court of Appeals did not err in sustaining accused-appelant’s conviction despite the prosecution’s failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Where an accused admits killing the victim but invokes self defense, it is incumbent upon the accused to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he acted in self-defense. In the present case, there is no compelling reason to deviate from their findings. Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is entitled to an acquittal on the ground of lawful self-defense.