PEOPLE V GAPASIN

231 SCRA 728 (1994) o Also, he contends that the crime committed is homicide. Thus the court
sustained that it is murder and treachery attended its commission.
FACTS: - He executed it in a way that the victim was unaware and helpless.
Appellant is a member of the Philippine Constabulary. - His act of waiting for the victim behind the hollow block fence and
Prosecution witness, ALBERTO CARRIDO shooting at his right side.
 He together with Rodrigo Ballad and deceased Jerry Capilto, were about to o Also. Evident premeditation is present in the case
attend a “pamisa”.
 While they were walking along the barangay road appellant Gapasin shot
Capilto with an armalite. o Taking advantage of public position is likewise taken as an aggravating
 Thereafter, accused Amor Saludares planted a .22 caliber gun on the left hand circumstance as the appellant is a member of the Philippine
of Capilto. Constabulary and used the armalite that was issued to him upon he
 When the wife of the deceased came to his aid, Nicanor Saludares pointed a received the order.
gun at her and threatened to kill anyone who will come near Capilto.
o Voluntary surrender may be considered in appellant's favor but this is offset
Defense by the aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of public position.
 Appellant invoke self-defense Therefore, only the generic aggravating circumstance of evident
 He testified that he issued a mission to investigate a report regarding the premeditation may be appreciated against appellant.
presence of unidentified armed men in Barrio San Jose, Roxas, Isabela.
 The other accused Nicanor Saludares was the one who informed him that
Jerry Capilto had an unlicensed firearm
 Appellant and Nicanor Saludares went to see Capilto.
 When Capilto was about 3 meters away from him he asked what was bulging
in his waist.
 Instead of answering, he drew his firearm and fired twice at the appellant, but
he missed as appellant fell on the ground simultaneously firing his armalite.

Appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder qualified by treachery, with the
attendance of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, and the aggravating
circumstances of taking advantage of public position and evident premeditation.

HELD:

o Appellant claim of self defense cannot be accepted for it was found that the
victim was shot by someone standing on his right side
- His statement that he was in front of the victim when Capilto fired at him
was belied by the physical evidence that the victim sustained two gun
shot wounds entering the right side of his head.
o If they had not intended to harm the victim, they could have just apprehended
him or verified if he indeed possessed an unlicensed firearm.