Title
Romeo Dawat, Jr. y Harme vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 241126
Decision Date
Apr 28, 2021
Petitioner, accused of stabbing Wenceslao Flores, claimed self-defense but failed to prove unlawful aggression. SC upheld homicide conviction, citing credible prosecution witnesses and unsubstantiated defense claims. Penalty and damages affirmed.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 241126)

Facts:

  • Charge and Incident
    • Romeo H. Dawat, Jr. (petitioner) was charged with Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code for the death of Wenceslao Flores.
    • The crime allegedly took place around 10:00 PM on September 22, 2011, in Barangay Pambuhan, Mercedes, Camarines Norte.
    • Petitioner armed himself with a bolo and stabbed Wenceslao Flores in the neck, causing his instantaneous death.
  • Prosecution Version
    • On the night of the incident, Emily Aloc, Sherly Abanto, Robert Oliva, and Wenceslao were drinking together at a terrace when Wenceslao excused himself.
    • Emily saw petitioner holding Wenceslao by the neck and slitting it with a bolo.
    • Petitioner threatened Emily with the bolo but relented after she pleaded.
    • Robert saw Wenceslao bleeding and heard him say that petitioner stabbed him.
    • Wenceslao’s sister, Myrna, found him bloodied and lying face down; the victim declared petitioner responsible before he died at the hospital of hemorrhagic shock due to the neck wound.
  • Defense Version
    • Petitioner claimed self-defense, stating that he was asleep at the back of his house when awakened by Robert and Wenceslao’s shouts and stone-throwing acts.
    • Wenceslao allegedly jumped over the fence, threw a stone and punched petitioner while holding a knife.
    • Petitioner grabbed a bolo and, while holding Wenceslao by the head, accidentally caused the wound when Wenceslao moved his neck.
    • Petitioner denied intent to kill and claimed the wound was inflicted in self-defense.
  • Trial Court Proceedings and Decision
    • Petitioner pleaded not guilty but later interposed self-defense.
    • The trial court found the prosecution witnesses credible and held that petitioner’s admission did not justify the killing.
    • Petitioner was convicted of homicide and sentenced to 10 years and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months imprisonment, with damages awarded to the heirs of the victim.
  • Court of Appeals (CA) Ruling
    • The CA affirmed the conviction but modified the amount of civil indemnity and added temperate damages plus interest.
    • It ruled that petitioner failed to prove self-defense due to absence of unlawful aggression by the victim.
    • Petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied by the CA.
  • Petition to the Supreme Court
    • Petitioner contended the CA erred in crediting prosecution witnesses despite inconsistencies, and in rejecting his claim of self-defense.

Issues:

  • Did the Court of Appeals err in giving full credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses despite inconsistencies?
  • Did the Court of Appeals err in not giving credence to petitioner’s claim of self-defense due to alleged unlawful aggression by the victim?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.