People
vs Gregorio
G.R. Nos. 109614-15
March 29, 1996
Criminal Case Digest
Facts:
On the eve of May 7, 1986, Carlos Catorse together with his 15-year old son Romeo Catorse, arrived at the two-storey house of appellant Adronico Gregorio, at Sitio Bug-as, Brgy. Sta. Cruz in Murcia, Negros Occidental, to attend the wake of the latter’s grandson.
When Carlos and his son arrived, there were already people attending the wake. Downstairs, Adronico Gregorio, et. al. were conversing, while upstairs, “Tunggak” (son of Adronico), Ricardo Gregorio (brother of Adronico), et. al. were playing “pusoy” (Russian poker).
Persons attending the wake were requested by appellant Adronico to deposit with him any weapon in their possession for safekeeping to avoid any trouble. Complying therewith, Carlos handed over his “samurai” while John Villarosa and Remolito Calalas, surrendered their knives, to Adronico.
However, around 1:00 a.m. of May 8, 1986, while playing the Russian poker, appellant Ricardo Gregorio in a very loud voice, reprimanded “Tunggak” from peeping at the cards of other players, but the son of Adronico, shouted also in a very loud voice and wanted the game be stopped. When his father overheard it, he summoned his son and boxed him several times.
In order to pacify the father and son from further aggravation, Carlos Catorse intervened and begged Adronico to stop hurting his son and not to put him into shame before the crowd. When suddenly, co-appellant Ricardo stealthily stabbed Carlos from behind using the latter’s own samurai and thereafter hacked and stabbed him several times more in different parts of his body. Right after the deceased fell to the ground, Adronico for his part, repeatedly hacked the victim with bolo.
Romeo Catorse, son of the deceased, terrified of what he saw and ran out of the house. Later, when Romeo returned to the house of Adronico Gregorio, he was joined by his sister and younger brothers, together they found their father lying prostrate and dead. When the police authorities arrived to the scene of the crime, to investigate, the appellants already fled to another Sitio, but authorities pursued and succeeded in apprehending them.
Upon arraignment, both accused entered separate pleas of not guilty for murdering Carlos Catorse. Hence, another criminal case was instituted against Adronico Gregorio for the murder of Marcelo Lo.
Issue:
(a) Whether or not appellants can invoke self-defense in their criminal liabilities?
Held:
Appellant Adronico Gregorio interposed self-defense to exculpate himself from criminal liability, however, the trial court skeptic of the said plea, rejected the same. The futility of invoking self-defense is likewise revealed in the testimonies of accused Ricardo Gregorio and co-appellant brother. Ricardo’s testimony affirmed that it was Carlos Catorse who aggravated them initially, supported by Adronico’s claim, that the deceased first attacked his son and brother. The court held that not only are the foregoing declarations incredible and incredulous but are innately false and fatuous.
It is axiomatic that for self-defense to prosper, the following requisites must concur: (1) there must be unlawful aggression by the victim; (2) that the means employed to prevent or repel such aggression were reasonable; and (3) that there was luck of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.
The trial court agree that such aggravating circumstance of treachery (alevosia) may be appreciated against the appellants. Treachery exist when an offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend to directly and specially ensure its execution, without risks to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
Hence, before the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) could file its Appellee’s Brief, appellant Ricardo Gregorio died on December 12, 1993. Consequently, his criminal liability as well as his civil liability based solely thereon is extinguished. However, Adronico Gregorio is to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of Carlos Catorse and Marcelo Lo the sum of P50,000 each, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed in all respects. As aforestated, the death of Ricardo Gregorio extinguished both his criminal and civil liability arising from said crime.
G.R. Nos. 109614-15
March 29, 1996
Criminal Case Digest
Facts:
On the eve of May 7, 1986, Carlos Catorse together with his 15-year old son Romeo Catorse, arrived at the two-storey house of appellant Adronico Gregorio, at Sitio Bug-as, Brgy. Sta. Cruz in Murcia, Negros Occidental, to attend the wake of the latter’s grandson.
When Carlos and his son arrived, there were already people attending the wake. Downstairs, Adronico Gregorio, et. al. were conversing, while upstairs, “Tunggak” (son of Adronico), Ricardo Gregorio (brother of Adronico), et. al. were playing “pusoy” (Russian poker).
Persons attending the wake were requested by appellant Adronico to deposit with him any weapon in their possession for safekeeping to avoid any trouble. Complying therewith, Carlos handed over his “samurai” while John Villarosa and Remolito Calalas, surrendered their knives, to Adronico.
However, around 1:00 a.m. of May 8, 1986, while playing the Russian poker, appellant Ricardo Gregorio in a very loud voice, reprimanded “Tunggak” from peeping at the cards of other players, but the son of Adronico, shouted also in a very loud voice and wanted the game be stopped. When his father overheard it, he summoned his son and boxed him several times.
In order to pacify the father and son from further aggravation, Carlos Catorse intervened and begged Adronico to stop hurting his son and not to put him into shame before the crowd. When suddenly, co-appellant Ricardo stealthily stabbed Carlos from behind using the latter’s own samurai and thereafter hacked and stabbed him several times more in different parts of his body. Right after the deceased fell to the ground, Adronico for his part, repeatedly hacked the victim with bolo.
Romeo Catorse, son of the deceased, terrified of what he saw and ran out of the house. Later, when Romeo returned to the house of Adronico Gregorio, he was joined by his sister and younger brothers, together they found their father lying prostrate and dead. When the police authorities arrived to the scene of the crime, to investigate, the appellants already fled to another Sitio, but authorities pursued and succeeded in apprehending them.
Upon arraignment, both accused entered separate pleas of not guilty for murdering Carlos Catorse. Hence, another criminal case was instituted against Adronico Gregorio for the murder of Marcelo Lo.
Issue:
(a) Whether or not appellants can invoke self-defense in their criminal liabilities?
Held:
Appellant Adronico Gregorio interposed self-defense to exculpate himself from criminal liability, however, the trial court skeptic of the said plea, rejected the same. The futility of invoking self-defense is likewise revealed in the testimonies of accused Ricardo Gregorio and co-appellant brother. Ricardo’s testimony affirmed that it was Carlos Catorse who aggravated them initially, supported by Adronico’s claim, that the deceased first attacked his son and brother. The court held that not only are the foregoing declarations incredible and incredulous but are innately false and fatuous.
It is axiomatic that for self-defense to prosper, the following requisites must concur: (1) there must be unlawful aggression by the victim; (2) that the means employed to prevent or repel such aggression were reasonable; and (3) that there was luck of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.
The trial court agree that such aggravating circumstance of treachery (alevosia) may be appreciated against the appellants. Treachery exist when an offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend to directly and specially ensure its execution, without risks to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
Hence, before the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) could file its Appellee’s Brief, appellant Ricardo Gregorio died on December 12, 1993. Consequently, his criminal liability as well as his civil liability based solely thereon is extinguished. However, Adronico Gregorio is to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of Carlos Catorse and Marcelo Lo the sum of P50,000 each, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed in all respects. As aforestated, the death of Ricardo Gregorio extinguished both his criminal and civil liability arising from said crime.
