People vs. Guarin

The justifying circumstance of self-defense cannot be successfully invoked when unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is not proven, and even when unlawful aggression initially exists, it ceases the moment the accused disarms the victim, such that any further attack by the accused exceeds the bounds of self-preservation. The qualifying circumstance of treachery attends a killing when the attack is sudden and unexpected, depriving the unsuspecting victim of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor.

The accused-appellant Edgar Guarin y Veloso was indicted for Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, for the killing of Manny Manaois y Fernandez. The Information alleged that the killing was attended by treachery, the victim having been suddenly stabbed while about to board his motorized tricycle, unarmed and unsuspecting, with no chance to resist or defend himself. The case proceeded to trial after Guarin pleaded not guilty at arraignment.

On May 27, 2016, at around 6:45 a.m., Arcadio Botial and Manny F. Manaois were in Gayaman, Binmaley, Pangasinan, preparing to leave for work. Botial was loading a welding machine onto a tricycle while Manaois was about to board and drive the vehicle. As Manaois was busy putting the key in the ignition, Edgar Guarin y Veloso, without any provocation or warning, suddenly stabbed Manaois with a knife. Manaois tried to run and escape, but Guarin pursued him and stabbed him several times. Botial, stunned by the incident, was unable to move or shout for help. When the stabbing ceased, Botial boarded Manaois into the tricycle to rush him to the Specialist Group Hospital and Trauma Center in Dagupan City.

Barangay Kagawad Arnold Rosario, who lived near the area, was preparing to go to work when he heard people shouting outside. He went out to check the commotion and saw Guarin sitting on the floor holding a bloodied knife. Rosario talked to Guarin and watched him until police authorities arrived. During the investigation, Botial returned and told the police that he witnessed the crime, identifying Guarin as the perpetrator who stabbed Manaois several times. The police seized a fifteen (15)-inch knife from Guarin and brought him, together with witnesses Botial and Rosario, to the Police Station in Binmaley, Pangasinan for further documentation.

At the hospital, Dr. Carlito Arenas attended to Manaois, who was on the brink of death, gasping for breath, pale, with no blood pressure and cardiac activity. Manaois suffered twelve (12) stab wounds, four (4) abrasions, and contusions. On the same day, Manaois died. The Certificate of Death was presented by the prosecution, and Dr. Arenas testified that the cause of death was cardiopulmonary arrest, multi-organ failure secondary to severe blood loss.

Guarin presented a different version of events. He claimed that on the morning of May 27, 2016, he was on his way to a sari-sari store to buy coffee when Manaois, armed with a knife and appearing drunk, approached and threatened to kill him. Manaois tried to stab Guarin, but the latter was not hit as he was able to step backward. For the second time, Manaois attempted to stab Guarin, but the former fell on the ground. Seizing the opportunity, Guarin disposed Manaois of the knife. Guarin claimed he did not know what happened next, and when he regained his senses, he saw blood on his clothes and hands, which made him realize he could have harmed Manaois. He then surrendered himself to Barangay Kagawad Rosario. Guarin added that earlier that morning, Manaois had insulted him by calling him and his family members illiterate, which Manaois had done several times before, and that Botial was inside his house at the time of the incident and could not have witnessed it.

The RTC convicted Guarin, finding that the requisites of self-defense were not met. The trial court reasoned that other than Guarin's testimony, no evidence showed that Manaois initiated the confrontation, and even assuming the attack was initiated by Manaois, the imminence of peril ceased the moment Guarin disarmed him. The RTC also noted that Guarin had reason to show aggression, having been the object of Manaois's insulting remarks, and that the number of stab wounds inflicted indicated an irate mental state. The CA agreed with the trial court's findings, and both the People and Guarin manifested that they would no longer file Supplemental Briefs before the Supreme Court.

• Self-Defense: Guarin argued that he acted in self-defense, claiming that Manaois, armed with a knife and appearing drunk, attacked him first, and that he merely dispossessed Manaois of the knife after the latter fell to the ground.
• Credibility of Witness: Guarin assailed the RTC's reliance on the testimony of Botial, claiming that his testimony was doubtful and not worthy of full faith and credit, particularly because Botial's failure to warn Manaois or shout for help was contrary to human experience and not credible.

• Prosecution's Case: The People maintained that the prosecution established all elements of Murder, presenting the testimonies of eyewitness Arcadio Botial, Barangay Kagawad Arnold Rosario, and Dr. Carlito Arenas, and that Guarin's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

• Self-Defense: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's rejection of Guarin's claim of self-defense.
• Treachery: Whether the killing of Manaois was attended by the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
• Credibility of Witness: Whether the trial court erred in relying on the testimony of prosecution witness Arcadio Botial.

• Self-Defense: No. Self-defense was not established because unlawful aggression on the part of the victim was not proven, and even assuming it existed, it ceased when Guarin disarmed Manaois, making the subsequent attack excessive and beyond the bounds of self-preservation.
• Treachery: Yes. Treachery attended the killing because the attack was sudden and unexpected, the victim was unarmed and unsuspecting, and the stealth and swiftness of the attack rendered Manaois defenseless, diminishing the risk of retaliation to Guarin.
• Credibility of Witness: No. The trial court's reliance on Botial's testimony was proper, as his failure to warn Manaois or shout for help was not unnatural, and the trial court was in the best position to assess witness credibility.

• Self-Defense: The Court applied the settled rule that when self-defense is invoked, the burden of evidence shifts to the accused to prove it by credible, clear, and convincing evidence. The essential elements of self-defense are: (1) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel such aggression; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. Unlawful aggression is a conditio sine qua non for upholding self-defense; if there is nothing to prevent or repel, the other two requisites have no basis. In this case, Botial's eyewitness testimony established that Manaois was about to put the key in the ignition when Guarin unexpectedly stabbed him, and that Manaois tried to flee but was pursued and stabbed several times. Even assuming Guarin's version of facts, the unlawful aggression ceased when Manaois fell on the ground and Guarin successfully disarmed him. The Court cited the principle that when an unlawful aggression that has begun no longer exists, the one who resorts to self-defense has no right to kill or even wound the former aggressor. Guarin went beyond the call of self-preservation when he inflicted excessive, atrocious, and fatal injuries, as shown by the sixteen (16) injuries sustained by Manaois, twelve (12) of which were stab wounds concentrated on the area of the heart and other vital organs, while Guarin sustained no injury. The nature and number of wounds are important indicia that disprove a plea of self-defense.

• Treachery: The Court applied the definition of treachery under Paragraph 16, Article 14 of the RPC: the employment of means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime against a person which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. The two elements of treachery are: (1) at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself or to retaliate or escape; and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods, or forms of attack employed by him. In this case, Guarin's attack was sudden and unexpected. Manaois, who was about to board his tricycle with his eyes focused on starting its engine, was not aware of any impending danger, was unarmed, and had his defenses down. The stealth and swiftness of the attack rendered Manaois defenseless and diminished the risk of retaliation. Even when Manaois briefly ran away, Guarin pursued and continued stabbing him. Botial testified that Guarin was already holding a knife when approaching, indicating the attack was planned ahead of time.

• Credibility of Witness: The Court held that Botial's failure to warn Manaois or shout for help did not make his testimony highly suspicious. There is no hard and fast gauge for measuring a person's reaction or behavior when confronted with a startling occurrence; witnesses react differently depending on their situation and state of mind. The trial court found no reason not to believe Botial's testimony, and absent any controverting evidence that his identification and recollection were wrongly made or ill-motivated, they deserve full faith and credit. The Court deferred to the trial court's assessment of credibility, as it was in the best position to observe the demeanor of witnesses and determine whether they were telling the truth.

The Court also affirmed the appreciation of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, whose requisites are: (1) the accused has not been actually arrested; (2) the accused surrenders himself to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (3) the surrender is voluntary. All requisites were proven, as Guarin voluntarily surrendered himself and the weapon to Barangay Kagawad Rosario immediately after the incident. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed under Article 248 of the RPC in relation to Article 63 of the same code.

• Self-Defense — Unlawful Aggression as Conditio Sine Qua Non — Unlawful aggression is a conditio sine qua non for upholding the justifying circumstance of self-defense; if there is nothing to prevent or repel, the other two requisites of self-defense will have no basis. When an unlawful aggression that has begun no longer exists, the one who resorts to self-defense has no right to kill or even wound the former aggressor. The Court applied this doctrine in rejecting Guarin's claim, holding that even assuming unlawful aggression existed, it ceased when Manaois fell to the ground and Guarin disarmed him.

• Self-Defense — Burden of Evidence — When self-defense is invoked, the burden of evidence shifts to the accused to prove it by credible, clear, and convincing evidence. The accused claiming self-defense must rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the weakness of the prosecution. Self-defense cannot be justifiably appreciated when uncorroborated by independent and competent evidence or when it is extremely doubtful by itself.

• Treachery — Elements — Treachery is defined as the employment of means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime against a person which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. Its two elements are: (1) at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself or to retaliate or escape; and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods, or forms of attack employed by him. The essence of treachery is the sudden attack by the aggressor without the slightest provocation on the part of the unsuspecting victim.

• Voluntary Surrender — Requisites — The requisites of voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance are: (1) the accused has not been actually arrested; (2) the accused surrenders himself to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (3) the surrender is voluntary. All three requisites were proven in this case, as Guarin voluntarily surrendered himself and the weapon to Barangay Kagawad Rosario immediately after the incident.

• Credibility of Witnesses — Deference to Trial Court — When issues revolve on matters of credibility of witnesses, the findings of fact of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses, and its assessment of the probative weight thereof, as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings, are accorded high respect, if not conclusive effect, because the trial court has the unique opportunity to observe the demeanor of witnesses and is in the best position to discern whether they are telling the truth.

• "When an unlawful aggression that has begun no longer exists, the one who resorts to self-defense has no right to kill or even wound the former aggressor. To be sure, when the present victim no longer persisted in his purpose or action to the extent that the object of his attack was no longer in peril, there was no more unlawful aggression that would warrant legal self-defense on the part of the offender." — This passage articulates the controlling principle that unlawful aggression must be continuing at the time of the defensive act, and it was the basis for rejecting Guarin's claim of self-defense after he disarmed the victim.

• "The essence of treachery is the sudden attack by the aggressor without the slightest provocation on the part of the unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor arising from the defense which the offended party might make." — This passage defines the canonical formulation of treachery and was applied to find that the qualifying circumstance attended the killing of Manaois.

• "The fact that Botial failed to warn Manaois or shout for help during the incident does not make his testimony highly suspicious as Guarin would want it to appear. Such reaction was not at all uncommon or unnatural so as to make his testimony incredible." — This passage addresses the credibility challenge against the prosecution's eyewitness and establishes that there is no standard form of human behavioral response when confronted with a startling occurrence.

• People vs. Tica, 817 Phil. 588 (2017) — Cited as controlling precedent for the doctrines on self-defense, including the burden of evidence shifting to the accused, the essential elements of self-defense, unlawful aggression as a conditio sine qua non, and the principle that the nature and number of wounds are important indicia disproving a plea of self-defense.
• People vs. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016) — Cited as controlling precedent for the awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages in the amount of P75,000.00 each, and temperate damages of P50,000.00 for the killing of the victim.
• People vs. Racat, 817 Phil. 665 (2017) — Cited for the elements of Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code.
• People vs. Placer, 119 Phil. 268 (2013) — Cited for the requisites of voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance.
• Nacar vs. Gallery Frames, et al., 716 Phil. 267 (2013) — Cited for the imposition of interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all damages awarded from the date of finality of the decision until fully paid.

• Article 248, Revised Penal Code — Defines and penalizes Murder. The Court applied this provision in affirming Guarin's conviction and the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
• Article 14, Paragraph 16, Revised Penal Code — Defines treachery as the employment of means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime against a person which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. The Court applied this provision in finding that the killing was attended by treachery.
• Article 63, Revised Penal Code — Relates to the application of indivisible penalties. The Court cited this provision in relation to Article 248 for the imposition of reclusion perpetua.
• Republic Act No. 7659 — Amended Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court noted this amendment in defining the crime of Murder.

Caguioa, Carandang, Zalameda, and Gaerlan, JJ., concurred in the decision.