Title
People vs. Paat
Case
G.R. No. L-22231
Decision Date
Mar 21, 1968
A 1957 market altercation escalated when Marcelo Paat stabbed Teodorico Catuiran from behind; Teodorico retaliated stabbing Virgilio before collapsing. Supreme Court ruled murder with treachery, convicting Marcelo with reclusion perpetua.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-22231)

Facts of the Case

Marcelo Paat, Juan Donato, and Virgilio Paat were charged with murder following the death of Teodorico Catuiran. After trial, the lower court acquitted Juan Donato and Virgilio Paat due to reasonable doubt but convicted Marcelo Paat of murder, considering the mitigating circumstance of having acted on impulse. He was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal, with additional obligations to indemnify the heirs of the deceased. Marcelo Paat appealed this decision.

Proceedings and Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Upon review, the Court of Appeals found from the evidence that Paat was guilty of murder, characterized by treachery. It noted that the act of killing was premeditated and dismissed the application of mitigating circumstances, certifying the appeal to the Supreme Court, as the penalty could escalate to reclusion perpetua.

Circumstances Surrounding the Incident

The incident unfolded on August 25, 1957, in a marketplace where both parties were present. A verbal altercation arose when Eulogio Catuiran insulted Virgilio Paat, leading to a physical confrontation. While Juan Donato and Virgilio restrained Teodorico Catuiran, Marcelo Paat approached from behind and fatally stabbed Teodorico. The circumstances demonstrate that Teodorico, after being stabbed, was able to turn the situation around and injure Virgilio.

Medical Evidence and Testimonies

Medical testimony from Dr. Dulce Donato Baculi confirmed that Teodorico died from a stab wound that penetrated his lung, while Dr. Gregorio Reyes provided evidence regarding the injuries sustained by Virgilio. Witness accounts corroborated the sequence of events, particularly highlighting Marcelo's actions and the inability of the defense to substantiate claims of justifiable defense.

Legal Analysis

In determining the elements of the crime, the Supreme Court emphasized the lack of evidence supporting Marcelo Paat's claim of acting in defense of his brother. The t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.