People vs. Ramelo (2017)

People of the Philippines vs. Roderick R. Ramelo

G.R. No. 224888, November 22, 2017

MARTIRES, J:

Facts: Ramelo was charged with the crime of murder in an Information which alleges the accused with intent to kill, employing treachery suddenly stab NELSON PENA with a bladed weapon thereby inflicting stab wound in upper quadrant abdomen which caused his untimely death.

Accused-appellant invoked self-defense arguing that while he was smoking, Nelson's three companions approached him and he was suddenly slapped by Naji without any provocation on his part. Because of this, a scuffle soon followed.  After the three walked away from Ramelo, Nelson approached him, held him by his collar, strangled him, and pulled him towards the dance area of the disco. There he was further manhandled by Nelson and his three companions who rushed towards them. Nelson sat on Ramelo's abdomen and proceeded to punch his face while his companions and three others hit him on other parts of his body including his legs. Fearing that they intended to kill him, Ramelo pulled out his knife which was concealed in his right shoe and stabbed Nelson with it.

Issue: Whether or not the accused had acted in self-defense.

Ruling: No, Ramelo did not act in self-defense. To successfully claim self-defense, the accused must satisfactorily prove that: (1) the victim mounted an unlawful aggression against the accused; (2) that the means employed by the accused to repel or prevent the aggression were reasonable and necessary; and (3) the accused did not offer any sufficient provocation.

Here, prior to the stabbing incident, an altercation ensued between Nelson and Ramelo. However, the confrontation ceased due to Pilapil' s intervention. Ramelo even apologized to Nelson after they were separated. Hence, any unlawful aggression which Nelson may have perpetrated had effectively terminated. Instead, Ramelo was actively looking for his alleged assailants, Yokyok, Topi, and Naji, with whom he might have had a score to settle after his previous scuffle with them. This, coupled with the fact that Ramelo brought a weapon and cleverly concealed it in his shoe, negates the unlawful aggression on Nelson's part.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of unlawful aggression, there could be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete.

Gist: On appeal is the Decision of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed with modification the Judgment of the RTC finding accused-appellant Roderick R. Ramelo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder. On appeal, the CA found him guilty of homicide.