G.R. No. 135701 - People vs. Callet y Sabanal

On or about 5:00 p.m. on September 15, 1996, at Barangay Tambulan, Tayasan, Negros Oriental, the accused, Elbert Callet y Sabanal, allegedly committed the crime of murder.
The victim, Alfredo Senador, was fatally stabbed with a 9-inch hunting knife on the left shoulder near the base of the neck, sustaining a wound measuring 2 cm in length, 0.3 cm in width, and 11 cm in depth.
The stabbing occurred in a crowded flea market where the victim, his 12-year-old son Lecpoy Senador, and Eduardo Perater were present, observing a game of “cara y cruz.”

Lecpoy Senador testified that while observing the game, his father was sitting with his buttocks resting on his right foot when the accused, coming from behind, stabbed him.
Eduardo Perater corroborated the stabbing account, affirming that Alfredo Senador was sitting when he was attacked from behind with a hunting knife.
Manuel Gabonales, who was nearby at the scene, witnessed people fleeing and observed the victim soaked in blood after the accused ran towards a nearby basketball court, later assisting in moving the victim.
Dr. Rogelio Kho, the Municipal Health Officer, performed the autopsy and confirmed that a stab wound caused irreversible shock and severe hemorrhage, leading to death.

The accused and witnesses such as PO3 Roy Balasabas, Barangay Captain Dominador Calijan, and Nilo Callet provided a different account wherein a verbal altercation preceded the stabbing.
The defense version claimed that the incident began when the victim’s elbow struck the accused, leading to a confrontation in which the accused allegedly acted in self-defense, stabbing the victim.

Following the incident, while running towards the municipal hall, the accused was apprehended by barangay tanods.
On the way to the municipal hall, he admitted his act to the tanods, and subsequently surrendered his hunting knife upon reaching the municipal building.

The trial court found the accused guilty of murder, highlighting that the crime was executed with treachery and without affording the victim any opportunity to defend himself.
The evidence, particularly the consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses, was found to support the guilt of the accused beyond a scintilla of doubt.
Although the accused claimed self-defense and raised issues regarding the credibility of the eyewitnesses (noting a discrepancy between their affidavit and trial testimony), such inconsistencies were deemed immaterial given the overall clarity and directness of their accounts.
The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was recognized, resulting in the meting down of the penalty.

Whether the bias of a blood relative (Lecpoy Senador) impaired the credibility of his testimony.
The relevance of discrepancies between the joint affidavit and the trial testimonies regarding the victim’s position when stabbed.

Whether the accused successfully established the existence of unlawful aggression against him.
Whether there was reasonable necessity in the means employed by the accused to defend himself.
Whether there was lack of sufficient provocation justifying the use of force by the accused.

Whether evidence of treachery, including the method and manner of the stabbing, justified classifying the crime as murder.
Whether the prosecution failed to prove evident premeditation, or if treachery alone sufficed for the conviction.

Whether the accused’s voluntary surrender should mitigate his criminal liability despite the severity of the crime.