(ARTICLE 14 – SELF DEFENSE)

PEOPLE VS CARAO
403 SCRA 482
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SERGIO A. CARATAO, appellant.

FACTS: April 27, 1992, at, more or less, 4:20 oclock in the evening, at Nalco Commissary Compound, Hill
Top Village, Nasipit, Agusan del Norte, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon, approached Edgardo Bulawin riding his motorcycle
from behind and stab him, thus inflicting upon him stab wounds on the different parts of his body, which
directly caused his death. Case was filed against Caratao for murder. He admitted stabbing the victim but
claimed that his actions were only to defend himself from the victim’s aggressive behavior. Sergio A.
Caratao appeals from the RTC decision in CC# 513 dated December 12, 1995 finding him guilty of Murder.
During his arraignment, he invoked self-defense. There were testimonies of the defense’ eyewitnesses
that were contrasting to the testimonies of the prosecution’s eyewitnesses.

ISSUE:

1. Whether or not self defense will stand as a justifying circumstance in the case?

2. Whether or not there is murder by treachery?

3. Whether or not there were mitigating circumstances in the case?

4. Is it Murder or Homicide?

HELD:

1. NO. The accused must prove self-defense, the accused must show with clear and convincing
evidence: (1) that the victim committed unlawful aggression amounting to actual or imminent
threat to the life and limb of the person claiming self-defense; (2) that there was reasonable
necessity in the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression; and (3) that there
was lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person claiming self-defense or, at least, that
any provocation executed by the person claiming self-defense was not the proximate and
immediate cause of the victims aggression.

2. NO. Treachery is present when two conditions concur when the means, methods and forms of
execution employed gave the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate
and that such means, methods and forms of execution were deliberately and consciously adopted
by the accused without danger to his person. Evidence that Caratao’s grudge against the victim
was brought about only moments before the attack, when the latter ignored his repeated pleas
for rice. The sight of the victim leaving the compound without heeding appellants request must
have worsened his anger. In his testimony, appellant admitted that at that moment, he forgot
himself. It was thus only by chance and not by plan that he killed Bulawin.

3. YES. The accused voluntary surrendered showing his intent to submit himself unconditionally to
the authorities.

4. In the absence of qualifying circumstances, the crime committed is Homicide, not Murder.