P/SR. INSP. JIM CONAN, Complainant, I.S. NO. 1234 -versusFOR: HOMICIDE. KULAS SANTAMARIA and PEDRO SANTOS, Respondent, x---------------------------------/

RESOLUTION The Respondents, JUAN DELA CRUZ and PEDRO SANTOS were charged of the crime of HOMICIDE in a complaint filed by Police Senior Inspector JIM CONAN. In support of his complaint, the herein complainant attached the following documents: 1. Joint Affidavits of Jason Sun and Joana Gordonas; 2. Affidavit of Daisy Labastida; 3. Death Certificate of Juan dela Cruz; 4. Autopsy Report of Juan dela Cruz; 5. Anatomical Sketch of Juan dela Cruz; 6. Police Record of Events and others. Statement of Facts Based on the investigation conducted by the Police Investigator, PO2 JACKIE CHAN, the facts of the case are stated hereunder: That on or about the 1st day of January 2013, at around 12:45 in the afternoon in Brgy. Calanipa,

They both alleged that on January 1. As for the respondents. They later on had a disagreement on who will pay the drinks they ordered when in fact it was the deceased who persuaded them to drink with him on his account. they vehemently denied the accusations against them putting up self-defense. The respondents later on pulled knives tucked under their shirts and stabbed the victim repeatedly causing his death. While standing in the waiting shed. drew the knives tucked under their shirts and then and there stabbed JUAN DELA CRUZ repeatedly in different parts of his body. having a drinking spree with the deceased. they also saw that the respondents drew knives tucked under their shirts and stabbed repeatedly the other victim. Canlanipa. the respondents and the victim. In the affidavit of Daisy Labastida. 2013 at about 12:45 in the afternoon. it was the deceased who attempted to draw a pistol from his waist and so the respondents. while having a drinking spree. She then called the police and ambulance for help. also drew the knives tucked under their shirts and stabbed the Juan dela Cruz. Philippines. 2013 at about 12:45 in the afternoon. 2 . had a heated argument which resulted to a brawl between the three of them. they were at Brgy. In the joint affidavit of witnesses Jason Sun and Joana Gordonas. That in the course of the said brawl. in defense of themselves. the owner of the sari-sari store where the incident ensued stated that the respondents and the victim were drinking alcoholic beverages ordered from her store when they had an argument. JUAN DELA CRUZ. Surigao City. drinking liquors in a nearby sari-sari store and later on witnessed that the three were having an argument. when the incident took place. killing the latter instantly. they were at Brgy. Juan dela Cruz. stated that on January 1. KULAS SANTAMARIA and PEDRO SANTOS. Much to their surprise.Surigao City. That during said the heated argument. they saw the respondents and the victim. in their counter-affidavits. Surigao City. Canlanipa. The respondents then immediately flee using a motorcycle she believed one of them owned.

Homicide – Any person who. the following requisites must concur. it is a well settled rule that once an accused has admitted that he inflicted the fatal injuries on the deceased. However. admitted killing JUAN DELA CRUZ on the ground of self-defense. It is clear that the abovementioned elements are present. shall kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article. to prove the justifying circumstances claimed by him with clear. not falling within the provisions of Article 246. JUAN DELA CRUZ. died because of the stabbed wounds inflected by the respondents as evidenced by the autopsy report. which is presumed. shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal. The intent to kill is also evident due to the fatal stabbed wounds the deceased received from the respondents. it is incumbent upon him in order to avoid criminal liability. killed him without justifying c) That the accused had the intention to kill. to wit: (1) Unlawful aggression. The elements of the crime are as follows: a) That a person was killed. People. The facts of the case before us quarely fall under the crime of Homicide. The deceased. or by that of parricide and infanticide. (Cabuslay vs. d) That the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of murder.Analysis/Findings and Recommendations Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code specifically states: “Art. b) That the accused circumstances. The respondents. 471 SCRA 241) In order for the justifying circumstances of self-defense to be appreciated. satisfactory and convincing evidence. (2) Reasonable necessity of 3 . as for their defense. 249.

the theory of self-defense must fail. MAGLINTE-DACUTANAN Assistant City Prosecutor APPROVED BY: MARIA B. there is aggression in contemplation of the law only when the one attacked faces real and immediate threat to one’s life. JAMAICA A. Orchid. 499 SCRA 64) The defendants failed to persuade the Investigation Prosecutor that the killing was indeed done in self-defense. UGAY Chief City Prosecutor Copy furnished: (1) Kulas Santamaria-Brgy. Hence.the means employed to prevent or repel the attack. Philippines. Surigao City. Perlas. not imaginary. WHEREFORE. a primordial element of selfdefense. (People vs Dagani. would presuppose an actual. it is most respectfully recommended that information for the crime of Homicide be filed against the respondents KULAS SANTAMARIA and PEDRO SANTOS. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING. It can be gleamed that there was no unlawful aggression as there was no actual or imminent danger. Unlawful aggression. sudden and unexpected attack or imminent danger on the life and limb of the person – not a mere threatening or intimidating attitude – but most importantly. Aggression presupposes that the person attacked must face a real threat to his life and the peril sought to be avoided is imminent and actual. Surigao City 4 . this 5th day of January 2013. and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. Surigao City (2) Pedro Santos-Brgy. at the time the defensive action was taken against the aggressor.