G.R. No. 133382 March 9, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EFREN MENDOZA y SALVADOR, accused-appellant.
Criminal Case
Digest
Digested Cases
Criminal Law
Facts:
According the testimonies of appellant Efren Salvador and his
family, Anchito Nano began destroying their house and thereafter had hit appellant’s
son, Ernie Mendoza, in the head which prompted appellant to take action and
hack Anchito with a bolo in defense of his home, his family, and himself. He
later surrendered to the police after the incident and thereafter trial ensued.
Due to the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the defense and the lack of
proof for the requisite of unlawful aggression, appellant’s plea of
self-defense and defense of a relative cannot be appreciated. Appellant was
found guilty and although the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender
was appreciated in his favor it was offset by the aggravating circumstance of
treachery.
Issue:
Whether the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender
can be offset by the aggravating circumstance of treachery
Ruling:
A qualifying circumstance changes the nature of the crime. A
generic aggravating circumstance, on the other hand, does not affect the
designation of the crime; it merely provides for the imposition of the
prescribed penalty in its maximum period. Thus, while a generic aggravating
circumstance may be offset by a mitigating circumstance, a qualifying
circumstance may not. 32
Treachery in the present case is a qualifying, not a generic
aggravating circumstance. Its presence served to characterize the killing as
murder; it cannot at the same time be considered as a generic aggravating
circumstance to warrant the imposition of the maximum penalty. Thus, it cannot
offset voluntary surrender.
