People v. Alfredo Dulin, G.R. No.
171284, June 29, 2015 (3) Estelita Batulan – Tamayao went to her house around 10pm of the same date to
[Per J. Bersamin, First Division]
Topic: General Concepts
SUMMARY - Batulan stabbed Dulin who was able to wrest the knife from the former.
Accused Dulin was witnessed by several people to have stabbed Batulan to death. RTC
convicted Dulin of murder. CA affirmed this ruling but modified the civil liability. Dulin now
argues that he should be convicted of homicide only as there is no qualifying circumstance.
He argues that there was incomplete self-defense.
RATIO - The accused who pleads self defense admits the authorship of the crime. The
burden of proving self-defense rests entirely on him, that he must then prove by clear and
convincing evidence the concurrence of the following elements.
Dulin posits that the totality of circumstances constituted incomplete self-defense. The Court
rejected the argument. He should have proved the elements of incomplete self-defense.
FACTS
January 7, 1991 – Information was filed, averring that on or about August 22, 1990, in
the Municipality of Tugeugarao, Province of Cagayan, accused Dulin alias Freddie
was armed with a sharp bladed instrument, with intent to kill, with evident
premeditation and with treachery did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously attack, assault and stab Francisco Batulan, inflicting upon him several
stab wounds on different parts of his body which caused his death.
Four witnesses were presented during trial.
(1) Alexander Tamayao – He was on Tamayao Street in Atulayan Norte,
Tuguegarao. At 10pm of August 22, 1990, a young man ran from the house of
Vicente Danao to the house of the deceased Batulan. He shouted that his “Uncle
Totoy”, the deceased, was stabbed.
Tamayao ran to Danao’s house which was 30 meters away from Tamayao’s
house. Tamayao then saw the accused stab Batulan who was prostrate face down.
Dulin was on top of Batulan, as if kneeling with his left foot touching the ground and
holding Batulan by the hair with his left hand, and thrusting the knife at the latter with
his right hand.
Tamayao then ran to Batulan’s house and informed the victim’s wife, Estelia
Batulan (Tamayao’s aunt) about the incident. He then went home.
Tamayao mentioned the long standing grudge between Batulan and Dulin.
He saw them fighting in April 1990 and heard Dulin say on two occasions: “He will
soon have his day and I will kill him”.
(2) Romulo Cabalza (barangay tanod) – He was in his house around 10pm of the
same date when he heard the commotion in Danao’s house which was facing his
house. Carolina, Danao’s daughter, was screaming for help. He found another
barangay tanod. When he returned to the scene, he found Batulan at Danao’s door,
with Dulin wielding a sharp pointed instrument, about 6-7 inches long. Scared for his
safety, he rushed to the Barangay Hall to ask help from Edwin Cabalza and Nanding
Buenaflor to brin gBatulan to the Provincial Hospital in Carig, Tuguegarao.
tell her that Dulin stabbed her husband in Danao’s house. She fainted while rushing
to Danao’s house. When she regained consciousness, she was told that her husband
was rushed to the hospital. On the way there, she met Barangay Captain Loreto
Meman who told her “Finally, Freddie Dulin killed your husband as he vowed to do”.
In the hospital, she was told that her husband sustained 2 wounds in the back and
several stab wounds in front and was in the ICU before he died.
She said that Barangay Captain Meman went to her husband’s wake and
repeated what he said about Dulin. When she confirmed about the statement, he said
“I’m sorry I cannot go and declare what I have stated because I am afraid of Freddie
and he will kill all those persons who will testify in their favor”.
She mentioned the heated discussion between her husband and his
nephew, Seong Bancud, in from of Danao’s house in April 1990. Then, Dulin wielded
a knife and tried to stab her husband. Dulin was pacified when she went to aid her
husband but she heard him say “You will soon have your day, I will kill you.”
(On damages) She also said that her late husband earned a living from
buying pigs, deriving a monthly income eof P 8000.00. They only had one child. They
spent the following: P6.5k for hospitalization including medicines, P36k for the 10-day
wake, burial attire and coffin, P6.8k for one butchered cow during the wake, and P15k
for 6 pigs during the wake. The deathbed caused so much pain to the family. They
spent a total of P70k plus P20k for counsel’s services in brining the criminal charges.
(4) Dr. Nelson Macaraniag – Batulan was brought to the Cagayan Valley Regional
Hospital on that day. Macaraniag said the victim was in a state of shock from his 12
stab wounds. Macaraniag was part of the 3 teams that conducted the surgery on
Batulan. The Medico-Legal Certificate attesting that Batulan died on August 24, 1990
at 12:15 am and that he sustained 12 “lacerated wounds”. He stated the cause of
death is “Hypovolemic shock secondary to Massive Hemothorax secondary to
Multiple stab wounds”.
He clarified that there were clerical errors in the preparation of the Certificate
because his handwritten records indicated that the victim sustained stab wounds and
not lacerated wounds. One of the clerks could have misread his handwriting.
Accused Dulin testified that he was in his house on that same evening in Atulayan
Norte, Tuguegara, Cagayan with Doming Narag, Imedla Danao, Jun Danao, Carolina
Dulin and Caridad Narag. Nicanor Annariao and Raymond Soriano went to his house
to see the fighting cocks being sold by Alberto Eugenio. Alberto was not yet there and
only arrived at 8pm to talk with Raymund and Nicanor about the price. After the sale,
Alberto served Nicanor and Raymund food, and Dulin and jun Danao went with the 2
to the highway to get a tricycle. On the way, Angel Bancud called out and Dulin asked
the others to go ahead and he would catch up.
Dulin approached Bancud and Batulan, Dulin’s mother’s cousin, stabbed him
on the right side of his body and in the left hand. Dulin said “Uncle you hit me
(Dinigrasya nakun)”. Batulan replied “I will kill you”. So Dulin ran to the upper level of
Carolina Danao’s house. Batulan chased him and stabbed him again several times.
They grappled for the weapon and Dulin wrested it from Batulan. Dulin the stabbed
Batulan and they struggled until Dulin felt weak and fell to the ground. Dulin regaind
consciousness the next day at the hospital.
Dulin said there was no grudge between him and Batulan but said that the
barangay captain would summon him to bring Batulan home everytime the later
would be drunk at night.

Erlinda Danao, Records Officer of the Cagayan Valley Regional Hospital,
authenticated the hospital records which showed that Dulin was also injured.
December 29, 1997 - The RTC convicted Dulin of murder and appreciated the
privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense and no aggravating
circumstance. The penalty was lowered by 2 degrees. He was to suffer reclusion
temporal maximum (17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years) and to indemnify the
heirs P50k and to pay actual damages of P36k and moral damages of P40k.
August 26, 2005 - Dulin argued that his crime should be homicide and not murder.
The CA affirmed the conviction and modified the civil liability. The award of actual
damages was deleted. But he was to pay the heirs P20k for temperate damages and
P50k for moral damages.
January 12, 2006 - The CA denied his MR.
ISSUES
WON there was self defense – NO
The accused who pleads self defense admits the authorship of the crime. The burden
of proving self-defense rests entirely on him, that he must then prove by clear and
convincing evidence the concurrence of the following elements: (1) unlawful
aggression; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the
unlawful aggression; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself.
Unlawful aggression is the most important element and it is the condition sine qua
non for upholding self-defense as a justifying circumstance. This was described in
People v. Nugas.
Dulin argues that all elements were present in this case. The Court affirms the CA’s
rejection of this argument and observed that although Batulan initiated the attack, the
unlawful aggression from Batulan ceased once Dulin had wrested the weapon from
him. Dulin had control of the weapon. Whatever he did after constituted retaliation
against Batulan. Retaliation is not the same as self-defence.
Dulin further argues that Batulan continued to follow him to end Dulin’s life and there
was no gap in the aggression initiated by Batulan. The Court rejected this arguemtn
and said that Dulin admitted successfully disarming Batulan and running away from
him. The medico-legal examination also showed that Batulan sustained 12 stab
wounds which confirmed the cessation of the attack by Batulan.
WON incomplete self defense was proved – NO
Article 69 of the RPC provides that the privileged mitigating circumstance of
incomplete self-defense reduces the penalty two degrees. The accused must prove
the existence of the majority of the elements.
Dulin posits that the totality of circumstances constituted incomplete self-defense. The
Court rejected the argument. He should have proved the elements of incomplete self-
defense. With Batulan’s aggression having ceased from the moment Dulin disarmed
him, there would be no incomplete self-defense. Also, he stabbed Batulan several
times which shows that Dulin did not try to defend himself or repel attack but tried to
inflict injury.
WON the RTC and CA erred in appreciating the attendance of treachery – YES
Murder is the unlawful killing of any person attended by any of the circumstances
listed in Article 248 of the RPC. Treachery is one such qualifying circumstance.
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons,
employing means and methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend to
directly and specially ensure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the
defense which the offended party might make.
Two conditions must concur in order for treachery to be appreciated, namely: one, the
assailant employed means, methods or forms in the execution of the criminal act
which give the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and
two, said means, methods or forms of execution were deliberately or consciously
adopted by the assailant. Treachery, whenever alleged in the information and
competently and clearly proved, qualifies the killing and raises it to the category of
murder
ITC, treachery should not be appreciated in the killing of Batulan because the
stabbing did not take Batulan by surprise because the latter was sufficiently
forewarned. He had the opportunity to defend himself, or to escape, or even to
recover control of the weapon.
The essence of treachery is that the attack comes without warning, or is done in a
swift, deliberate and unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed and
unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape, without the slightest provocation
on the part of the victim.
WHEREFORE, the Court MODIFIES the judgment promulgated on August 26, 2005
by finding ALFREDO DULIN Y NARAG guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
HOMICIDE, and SENTENCES him to suffer the indeterminate sentence of EIGHT
YEARS AND ONE DAY OF PRISION MAYOR, AS THE MINIMUM, TO 14 YEARS,
EIGHT MONTHS AND ONE DAY OF RECLUSION TEMPORAL, with full credit of his
preventive imprisonment; ORDERS him to pay to the heirs of Francisco Batulan
P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P25,000.00 as
temperate damages, plus interest of 6% per annum on each item reckoned from the
finality of this decision until full payment; and DIRECTS him to pay the costs of suit.