Title
People vs. Ramos
Case
G.R. No. 190340
Decision Date
Jul 24, 2013
Rogelio and Marissa convicted of murder for hacking unarmed Abacco; self-defense and alibi claims rejected; treachery and excessive force proven.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 190340)

Factual Antecedents

On June 28, 2006, Rogelio and Marissa were charged with murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). The prosecution alleged that on the evening of April 11, 2006, the accused conspired to kill Abacco using bladed weapons while he was defenseless. The charging document specified treachery and abuse of superior strength as aggravating circumstances. Upon arraignment, both appellants pleaded not guilty, leading to a trial.

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution presented a comprehensive case with testimonies from eight witnesses, including law enforcement and medical personnel. Their accounts indicated that Rogelio attacked Abacco with a samurai sword after provocative actions taken by Rogelio and Marissa, who subsequently encouraged the assault despite Abacco's pleas for mercy. Forensic evidence from Dr. Arsenio Parazo confirmed that Abacco died from numerous life-threatening wounds sustained in the attack.

Version of the Defense

The defense offered conflicting narratives, asserting that Rogelio acted in self-defense against Abacco, who allegedly initiated the violence by attacking him with a bolo. Marissa claimed she was not present during the attack, providing an alibi that failed to meet the legal standards for creating physical impossibility. Their testimonies were contradicted by substantial evidence and witness accounts placing them at the scene during the incident.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) sentenced both accused to reclusion perpetua, finding them guilty of murder on February 28, 2007. The court rejected the self-defense claim, stating that once the accused began their attack, any unlawful aggression from the victim ceased. The RTC also ruled that the vicious nature of the assault illustrated a motive to kill, not merely to defend oneself.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals upheld the RTC's decision while modifying the damage awards. The appellate court reasoned that the appellants failed to prove self-defense and characterized Rogelio's actions as retaliation marked by treachery, given the premeditated and coordinated nature of the attack.

Assignment of Errors

Dissatisfied with the Court of Appeals' ruling, the appellants raised multiple claims of error, including a challenge to the sufficiency of the proof of guilt and the credibility of prosecution witnesses, along with a dispute over the assertion of treachery during the murder.

Our Ruling

The Supreme Court rejected the appeal, maintaining that Rogelio's acknowledgment of involvement in Abacco's death necessitated proof of self-defense, which he failed to establish. The court concluded that the alleged aggression from Abacco, characterized as unarmed and inviting dialogue, did not constitute a justifiable cause for the lethal response. Furthermore, it found no merit in Marissa's alibi

...continue reading

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.