BY CLAIMING SELF-DEFENSE, THE BURDEN RESTS UPON APPELLANTS TO SHOW

THAT THE KILLING WAS JUSTIFIED

CRIMINAL LIABILITY EXTINGUISHED WHEN DEATH OF OFFENDER OCCURS BEFORE

FINAL JUDGMENT

MURDER; EXTINGUISHMENT OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

PEOPLE v. RICAPLAZA|
G.R. No. 205151. September 16, 2015

Deceased Romeo was killed inside the fenced premises of the residence of accused
Eddie and his wife Alma Ricaplaza where both accused Rico and Demetrio were at the time.
Accused Rico and his sister-in-law, Alma, testified that the deceased arrived in the house of the
latter and stabbed Rico. The ensuing facts and the participation of the three (3) accused in the
stabbing incident which caused the death of Romeo, which qualified the crime to murder, have
been testified to by Gilbert Tupas. The testimony of Tupas also revealed the identity of the
person of accused Rico who inflicted the other stab wound on the stomach of Romeo. The
testimony of Tupas as well as the medical findings on the injuries/stab wounds inflicted on
Romeo further debunks and completely demolished the declaration of self-defense by Rico, for
if it was true that Romeo had initially stabbed him, Rico must have been able to wrestle the knife
from Romeo thereby ending the unlawful aggression to his (Rico) person, by Romeo, as he was
seen together with his father Demetrio stabbing Romeo while his brother Eddie was holding the
right arm of Romeo. Further, the testimony of Alma and Rico that Romeo was drunk at the time
is not supported or corroborated by the autopsy report on Romeo's cadaver. Finding the
qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength to have attended the killing, the trial court
found appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and disposed of the case in this
wise. Pending appeal, appellant Demetrio died.

RELATED TOPICS
1.) Murder; Qualifying Circumstance Abuse of Superior Strength
2.) Art. 89 Extinguishment of criminal liability.

ISSUE
Are the accused justified in killing Romeo?
Does Demetrio, now deceased, remain to be criminally liable?

RULING
NO. The fact remains that the prosecution satisfactorily established that appellants
were the ones who stabbed and killed the victim. Moreover, it must be stressed that by
claiming self-defense, the burden rests upon appellants to show that the killing was justified.
As correctly observed by the RTC and the CA, appellants miserably failed to prove that the
victim was the unlawful aggressor. Their self-serving testimonies are not only
unsubstantiated and bereft of any corroboration, but also belied by the physical evidence.
They also failed to prove the reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or
prevent the alleged attack coming from the victim.
NO. As regards appellant Demetrio, his criminal liability was totally extinguished by
virtue of his death before final judgment.
Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code pertinently provides:
 Article 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. Criminal
liability is totally extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as to
pecuniary penalties, liability therefore is extinguished only when the death of
the offender occurs before final judgment
VERDICT: GUILTY; MURDER