People vs. Oñas

A killing preceded by unlawful aggression without provocation by the accused, but effected with unreasonable means, constitutes homicide with incomplete self-defense, not murder, and excludes treachery. The presence of the first two elements of self-defense mitigates liability, while the absence of reasonableness in the means employed prevents complete exoneration and the victim's initiation of the encounter negates a treacherous attack.

Sergio Oñas lived in and maintained a store in the sitio of Pantao, Pontevedra, Negros Occidental, situated near a road and about seven meters from a billiard hall frequented in the afternoons and evenings. Simeon Gallego was connected to Oñas through a small monetary transaction involving P5.80, characterized by the prosecution as a debt and by Oñas as a partial loan. No other statutory, regulatory, or prior-litigation backdrop is supplied by the decision.

Sergio Oñas kept a store in sitio Pantao, Pontevedra, Negros Occidental, near a road and about seven meters from a billiard hall where people played in the afternoons and evenings. On September 4, 1958, several camineros lived in his house. Simeon Gallego owed Oñas P5.80 on that day.

According to the prosecution, through Isabelo Gallego, son of the deceased, Isabelo went to Oñas's store at about 2 o'clock in the afternoon of September 4, 1958, offering P2.50 sent by his father in part payment of the P5.80 debt. Oñas refused to accept the lesser amount, uttering that if Simeon did not pay that afternoon something would happen to him. That evening Isabelo went to the billiard hall beside Oñas's house to watch the games and saw his father also watching. At about 6 o'clock Oñas appeared at the hall, and Isabelo saw his father lying on his back with Oñas hitting him in the face. When the chief of police arrived, Isabelo's father was lifted, placed in a pickup, and brought home.

Oñas, for his part, denied that Isabelo offered partial payment and stated that he treated Simeon with respect, having given him P5.80 from a requested P10.00 loan with a promise to complete the amount later. He testified that in the evening Simeon appeared at the store with a cane, accompanied by a son-in-law and a son, and called for him. When Oñas went out, Simeon struck him on the right part of the head, causing Oñas to fall to a sitting position supporting himself with his hands. As Simeon continued the attack, Oñas went inside the store, took a cane with a bayonet from where it hung, rushed to the door, and, in warding off Simeon's blows, unconsciously thrust the bayonet and wounded Simeon, who fell. Fearing continuation of the attack by Simeon's companions, Oñas closed the store. The wife of Oñas told the investigating chief of police that Simeon was about to enter their house, that she and her daughter blocked his way, that Simeon pushed the daughter aside and hit Oñas's wife on the left and right arm, and that Oñas rushed with his bayonet and in the struggle Simeon died.

Simeon sustained a one-inch stab wound penetrating the thoracic cavity and right lung and passing through the right back, and a two-inch incised wound on the face at the right mandible penetrating the masseter muscle and piercing the back at the neck. Oñas sustained a 3/4-inch lacerated wound by scalp depth in the supra orbital region and severe ecchymosis of both left upper and lower lids, estimated to heal in seven to eight days barring complications. His wife Gleceria Geron sustained a contusion on the lower anterior aspect of the left forearm. The bayonet with its scabbard was introduced in court. That same evening Oñas was brought to the municipal chief of police's office where he executed an affidavit, presented as Exhibit "1" for the defense and Exhibit "C" for the prosecution, without translation in the record.

• Denial of Threat and Assertion of Good Relations: Petitioner maintained that Isabelo Gallego never offered P2.50 in partial payment, that he treated Simeon Gallego with respect, and that the P5.80 represented money he had loaned to Simeon out of a requested P10.00, with a promise to complete the amount later.
• Self-Defense Against Cane Attack: Petitioner argued that Simeon, armed with a cane and accompanied by a son-in-law and a son, called him out, struck him on the right part of the head causing him to fall to a sitting position, and continued the attack, compelling him to seize a cane-bayonet inside the store and thrust it unconsciously while warding off blows at the store door.
• Corroboration by Injuries and Eyewitnesses: Petitioner maintained that the medical certificate showing his head wound and his wife's forearm contusion, together with the testimony of two eyewitnesses, corroborated unlawful aggression by the deceased and his account embodied in his affidavit before the chief of police.

• Refusal of Partial Payment and Threat: Respondent countered through Isabelo Gallego that Oñas refused the P2.50 partial payment on the P5.80 debt at about 2 o'clock in the afternoon and threatened that something would happen to Simeon if he did not pay that afternoon.
• Unprovoked Assault at the Billiard Hall: Respondent argued that at about 6 o'clock in the evening, while father and son were watching games at the billiard hall beside Oñas's house, Oñas appeared and assaulted Simeon without provocation, leaving him lying on his back while hitting him in the face, as supported by the fatal bayonet wounds.

• Unlawful Aggression and Provocation: Whether the stabbing was preceded by unlawful aggression on the part of the deceased without provocation by the accused.
• Reasonableness of Means and Incomplete Self-Defense: Whether the accused is entitled to complete acquittal as acting in self-defense, or is liable under incomplete self-defense for using unreasonable means to repel the aggression.
• Treachery: Whether the killing was attended by alevosia so as to constitute murder.

• Unlawful Aggression and Provocation: Yes. The stabbing was preceded by unlawful aggression without provocation by the accused, the injuries to the accused and his wife and corroborating eyewitnesses being inconsistent with an unprovoked attack by the accused.
• Reasonableness of Means and Incomplete Self-Defense: Incomplete self-defense only, not acquittal. The third element was absent because stabbing with a bayonet went beyond what was necessary to repel a cane attack.
• Treachery: No. Alevosia was not present, a treacherous assault being incompatible with a killing that followed blows already inflicted by the deceased-aggressor on the accused and his wife.

• Unlawful Aggression and Provocation: The wounds on Oñas's head and his wife's arm would not have been caused if the sole prosecution witness's account of an unprovoked bayonet attack were true. Since a bayonet is a more deadly and effective instrument than a cane, the accused and his wife would not have received said injuries had the accused already been armed with the bayonet when Simeon attacked with a cane. Supported by two defense eyewitnesses, the aggression must therefore have begun with Simeon striking Oñas with a cane in front of the store, probably after learning of the refusal of partial payment, to seek an explanation for perceived insult.
• Reasonableness of Means and Incomplete Self-Defense: With his cane the accused could have warded off the deceased's blows, and merely drawing the bayonet would have sufficed to discourage and prevent continuation of the attack. By actually stabbing the deceased with the bayonet, the accused exceeded necessary defense, leaving the first two elements of self-defense present but the third absent and reducing liability to homicide with incomplete self-defense as mitigation.
• Treachery: If the deceased started the aggression and received the thrust only after inflicting blows on the accused and his wife, the assault could not have been executed with treachery. The finding below of alevosia was thus belied by the sequence of aggression and response.

• Incomplete self-defense as mitigating circumstance — Where unlawful aggression and lack of provocation are present but reasonable necessity of the means employed is absent, criminal liability is not extinguished but mitigated. Applied here to reduce murder to homicide with incomplete self-defense, because Simeon's prior cane attack without provocation by Oñas was established, yet the fatal bayonet stab exceeded necessary defense.
• Reasonable necessity of the means employed — Self-defense requires that the means used to prevent or repel aggression be reasonably necessary under the circumstances; mere display or lesser resistance suffices if capable of stopping the attack. Applied to find that warding off blows with a cane or merely drawing the bayonet would have discouraged Simeon, making the actual stabbing unreasonable.
• Treachery (alevosia) negated by victim's aggression — Treachery requires a sudden, unexpected attack ensuring execution without risk from the victim's defense; it cannot attend a killing that is a response to aggression already commenced by the deceased. Applied to reject murder, since Simeon had already struck Oñas and his wife before receiving the bayonet thrust.

• "We find in consequence that the stabbing of the deceased was preceded by an unlawful aggression without aggression without provocation on the part of the accused." — States the core factual finding establishing the first two requisites of self-defense and grounding mitigation.
• "With his cane the defendant-appellant could have warded off the blows made by the deceased; and even if he had actually drawn his bayonet this drawing of the bayonet would have been sufficient to prevent the deceased from continuing with the attack." — Defines why the third requisite of reasonable means failed, converting complete self-defense into incomplete self-defense.
• "If the deceased started the aggression and received the dagger thrust after he had already inflicted blows on the defendant and his wife, it cannot be stated that the defendant-appellant made the assault on the deceased with treachery." — Articulates the rejection of alevosia and the reduction from murder to homicide.

Padilla, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur. Bengzon, C.J., and Bautista Angelo, J., took no part.