now have a permanent nerve injury, a wrist drop. There is already a paralysis of the wrist. And he also sustained a lacerated wound on his forehead. PROSECUTOR VILLAMIN: Q : So, there are eleven (11) injuries on the patient? A : Yes, sir. (TSN, July 2, 1996, pp. 6-7) 3 The Case for the Petitioner 43
The petitioner invoked self-defense. The CA summarized the evidence of the petitioner in the RTC, thus: … In the early morning of August 25, 1995 at around 12:30 o’clock, while Conrado Casitas was walking strumming his guitar and singing, Benhur Bonaobra pelted him with stones, hitting his chest twice. Romeo Boringot suddenly appeared and hacked him with a bolo. Conrado was able to parry the first bolo attack with his guitar. When Romeo continued to attack him, accused pulled his bolo from his waist and they engaged in a duel. When Romeo fell down, Conrado run (sic) away and went on foot to the Ziga Memorial Hospital where he was treated by Dr. Magayanes. While being treated in the hospital, the police arrived and he surrendered himself including his bolo. Felixberto Bo, a resident of Bonot, Tabaco, Albay, heard a shout for help at about 12:00 o’clock midnight on August 25, 1994 and being a Barangay Tanod he got down from his house and started to run towards the direction of the person shouting for help; that he met Conrado Casitas at the bridge and he asked Conrado what happened; that accused told him that Romeo Boringot waylaid him and that he left him (victim) on the ground; that Felixberto proceeded walking and saw Romeo Boringot by the roadside near a coconut tree and full of blood; that when he arrived, his compadre Reynaldo was already there; that Apolonio Bueza was also there; that Santos Bueza, a Kagawad member of the barrio and Benigno Boqueo also a member of the Barangay Council were also there including the wife of Romeo Boringot; that he was the one who took charge in having Romeo brought to the hospital (TSN, January 17, 1997, pp. 6-7; 11-13). 4 The trial court rejected petitioner’s plea of self-defense and convicted him of frustrated homicide. On appeal to the CA, the petitioner asserted the following: I. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT DESPITE THE EXISTENCE OF THE JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE OF SELF-DEFENSE. II. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF HOMICIDE ON THE BASIS OF THE WEAKNESS OF THE DEFENSE’S EVIDENCE. III. THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER ON THE PART OF THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT. 5 The CA affirmed the decision of the RTC and dismissed the petitioner’s appeal. He now asserts in this case that the RTC and the CA erred in not giving merit to his plea of self-defense. In the alternative, in case his conviction is affirmed, the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender should be appreciated in his favor.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 46 pages?
- Summer '05
- Appellate court, Trial court, Stabbing, Romeo Flores