G.R. No. 216642 - Cruz y Basco vs. People

Case Summary (G.R. No. 216642)

Facts of the Case

Cruz was charged with homicide for the fatal shooting of Gerwin Torralba, a 9-year-old child hit by a stray bullet during an altercation between Cruz and Archibald Bernardo, who was also shot but survived. Cruz was likewise charged with frustrated homicide for the attempted killing of Bernardo. The incident occurred in Manila while Cruz was on duty and conducting patrol. The prosecution presented witnesses who detailed the sequence in which Cruz confronted Bernardo, fired multiple shots, and accidentally shot Torralba, who was flying a kite nearby.

Trial Court Findings

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide concerning the death of Torralba due to lack of criminal intent, and guilty of frustrated homicide regarding the attack on Bernardo. The RTC sentenced Cruz accordingly and ordered payment of civil and moral damages to the victims and heirs.

Court of Appeals Decision

The CA upheld the RTC’s ruling in its entirety. It affirmed the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence and discredited Cruz’s defense, which included claims of self-defense and lawful performance of duty. The CA did not discuss in detail the justifying circumstances or mitigating factors such as voluntary surrender or sufficient provocation that Cruz claimed.

Issues for Supreme Court Review

Whether Cruz was acting in lawful self-defense or in fulfillment of his police duty at the time of the shooting.
Whether mitigating circumstances of sufficient provocation and voluntary surrender should be recognized in favor of Cruz.
Whether the death of Torralba should be treated as homicide rather than recklessly imprudent homicide.

Supreme Court’s Analysis: Self-Defense and Fulfillment of Duty

The Court emphasized that self-defense requires proof, by clear and convincing evidence, of unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of means used, and absence of sufficient provocation by the accused. The Court affirmed RTC and CA findings that Cruz failed to prove unlawful aggression by Bernardo, as there was no evidence Bernardo first drew his firearm or made an imminent attack. Consequently, the plea of self-defense was not established.

Regarding fulfillment of duty, the Court held that merely being on duty is insufficient to justify acts not made in furtherance of lawful police duties. The evidence showed Cruz’s shooting was unjustified and not a necessary act in the lawful performance of his duty. Therefore, the justifying circumstance of lawful performance of duty does not apply.

Supreme Court’s Analysis: Liability for Torralba’s Death

The Court found that the death of Torralba, although unintentional, was a direct, natural, and logical consequence of Cruz’s intentional shooting at Bernardo, an intentional felony punishable under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. Under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code and the doctrine of aberratio ictus, an offender who commits an intentional felony is liable for all consequences resulting therefrom, even if unintended.

Consequently, Torralba’s death constitutes homicide, not reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. The criminal negligence characterization was inconsistent with the established intentional felony of shooting.

Supreme Court’s Analysis: Mitigating Circumstances

The Court recognized the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender under Article 13, paragraph 7, of the Revised Penal Code because Cruz voluntarily surrendered himself and his service firearm to authorities immediately after the incident. Documentary evidence (Booking Sheet, Crime Report) supported this finding.

However, sufficient provocation as a mitigating circumstance was disallowed because Cruz failed to prove Bernardo’s acts constituted unjust or improper conduct adequate to excite a grave reaction leading to the shooting. The brief verbal exchange and the lack of proof that Bernardo first drew his gun negated the claim of sufficient provocation.

Modifications of Penalties and Damages

The Supreme Court modified the penalties as follows, considering the recognition of voluntary surrender and reclassification of Torralba’s death as homicide:

For homicide (Torralba’s death): Indeterminate penalty of eight years and one day to twelve years and one day imprisonment (prision mayor to reclusion temporal).
For frustrated homicide (attack on Bernardo): Indeterminate penalty o

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 216642)

Case Background and Procedural History

The case involves PO2 Bernardino Cruz y Basco (petitioner), who appealed under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court challenging the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA) Special Fourth Division, which affirmed the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 5 ruling.
Cruz was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and frustrated homicide in Criminal Cases Nos. 08-263728 and 08-263729.
The appeal contesting the CA decisions stemmed from incident events of September 9, 2008, leading to the death of Gerwin Torralba (minor) and the injury of Archibald Bernardo.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC ruling in toto on June 23, 2014, and denied Cruz's motion for reconsideration on January 21, 2015, prompting the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

Facts of the Incident

On September 9, 2008, Archibald Bernardo, while managing his LPG business and responding to a customer's complaint about a leaking LPG tank, proceeded via motorcycle to the customer's location along Paulino Street, Manila.
Bernardo encountered Cruz on a motorcycle near Balut Bakery; a brief verbal exchange ensued with Cruz challenging Bernardo.
Cruz drew his service firearm and fired multiple shots at Bernardo, hitting him twice on his left arm and once on his right wrist as Bernardo attempted to flee.
Simultaneously, a bullet struck Gerwin Torralba, a 9-year-old boy flying a kite nearby, causing fatal injury.
Cruz fled the scene on foot and later surrendered to his superior, handing over his service firearm.
Bernardo survived due to prompt medical treatment, while Torralba died upon arrival at the hospital.

Charges Filed Against Cruz

Cruz was charged with homicide for the death of Gerwin Torralba, accused of willfully and feloniously firing a gun causing mortal wounds leading to death.
He was also charged with frustrated homicide for shooting Archibald Bernardo, inflicting non-fatal but severe injuries amounting to an attempt to kill.
At arraignment, Cruz pleaded not guilty to both charges and the trial ensued.

Versions of Parties

Prosecution's Version:
- Cruz started firing without provocation after a terse verbal exchange, targeting Bernardo intentionally.
- Cruz's firing led to Bernardo’s injuries and Torralba’s accidental death by a stray bullet.
Defense's Version:
- Cruz acted in self-defense and lawful performance of duty as a police officer during roving patrol.
- Alleged that Bernardo overtook, blocked, almost collided, shouted provocations, and drew his gun first threatening Cruz.
- Cruz fired only in defense to prevent imminent harm and attempted to aid Bernardo after firing.

RTC Decision

The RTC found Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of:
- Reckless imprudence resulting in homicide for the death of Gerwin Torralba due to lack of criminal intent.
- Frustrated homicide in shooting Archibald Bernardo.
Imposed penalties included imprisonment from four months and one day of arresto mayor to four years and two months of prision correctional for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and a prison term between four years and two months to six years and one day for frustrated homicide.
Ordered Cruz to pay civil indemnity, actual, moral, and funeral damages to the victims’ heirs.

Court of Appeals Decision

The CA affirmed the RTC decision in toto on June 23, 2014.
The appellate court favored the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies and rejected