Inocencio Gonzalez

People of the Philippines vs. Gonzales, Jr.

People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Inocencio Gonzales, Jr., accused-appellant. G.R. No. 1395! June !1, !""1 Gonza#a-Re$es, J. %&'()* +n +ctoer 31, 199 at aout !*3" p.., the failies of Noel &ndres and herein accusedappellant /ere oth on their /a$ /a $ to the e0it of the o$ola 2eorial Par. &t the intersection  point, the cars the$ /ere drivin# alost collided. ater on, /hen &ndres &ndres found an opportunit$, he cut Gonzalez off, diseared fro his car an d /ent over to Gonzales4. <ercation then ensued. 2ean/hile, ino Gonzalez, son of Inocencio, entered the scene in defense of his father. %earin# that his son /as in dan#er, Gonzalez too ou t the #un /hich /as alread$ in his car copartent. 6pon seein# his father, Gonzalez4s dau#hter, dau#hter, (risha, (risha, hu##ed her father and in the  process held his hand holdin# the #un. (he appellant tried to free his hand and /ith (risha4s (risha4s sustantial od$ /ei#ht pushin# a#ainst hi the appellant lost his alance and the #un accidentall$ fired. %elier &ndres, Noel4s /ife, /as shot to death /hile their son, 7enneth and nephe/ 7evin /ere /ounded. (he trial court found the accused #uilt$ of the cople0 crie of urder and t/o counts of frustrated urder and accordin#l$ sentenced hi to de ath. &ccused /ere also ordered to pa$ for civil liailities to the heirs of 2rs. &ndres, and the parents of 7evin 8aldez. 8aldez. ence, an autoatic revie/ or this case.

I))6:)* 1. ;hether or not the trial court coitted reversile error /hen it found treacher$ /as present in the coission of the crie. !. ;hether or not the trial court coitted reversile error /hen it failed to appreciate voluntar$ surrender, passion and ofuscation, incoplete defense of a relative and lac of intent to coit so #rave a /ron# e considered as iti#atin# circustances. R6ING)* 1. It has een consistentl$ held $  $ this court that chance encounters, ipulse illin# or cries coitted at the spur of the oent or that /ere preceded $ heated hea ted altercations are #enerall$ not attended $ treacher$ for lac of opportunit$ of the accused to delieratel$ eplo$ a treacherous ode of attac. (hus, the sudden attac ade $ the accused due to his infuriation  $ reason of the victi4s provocation /as held to e /ithout treacher$. )udden attacs ade $ the accused preceded $  $ curses and insults $ the victi or acts tauntin# the accused to retaliate or the reellious or a##ressive ehavior of the victi /ere held to e /ithout treacher$ as the victi /as sufficientl$ fore/arned of reprisal. %or the rules on treacher$ to appl$ the sudden attac ust have een preconceived $ the accused, une0pected $ the victi and /ithout  provocation on the part of the latter. ;e affir the recoendation of the )olicitor-General )olicitor-General that

the shootin# /as not attended $ treacher$ and accordin#l$ the crie coitted for the death of %elier &ndres is hoicide and not urder. !. (he iti#atin# circustances of voluntar$ surrender, passion and ofuscation, incoplete defense of a relative and lac of intent to coit so #rave a /ron#, pleaded $ the defense, /ere not convincin#l$ proved and none can e considered in the iposition of penalties. (he testion$ of prosecution /itness contradicts the appellant4s pretense of voluntar$ surrender. (he iti#atin# circustance of passion and ofuscation is also not otainin#. Provocation ust  e sufficient to e0cite a person to coit the /ron# coitted and that the provocation ust e coensurate to the crie coitted. (he sufficienc$ of provocation varies accordin# to the circustances of the case. (he a##ressive ehavior of Noel &ndres to/ards the appellant and his son a$ e deeanin# or huiliatin# ut it is not sufficient provocation to shoot at the coplainant4s vehicle. (he plea for the appreciation of the iti#atin# circustance of incoplete defense of a relative is also uneritorious since the act of &ndres in cursin# and shoutin# at the appellant and his son do not aount to an unla/ful a##ression a#ainst the, ino Gonzalez. %inall$, the plea for the appreciation of the iti#atin# circustance of lac of intent to coit so #rave a /ron# is lie/ise devoid of erit. (his iti#atin# circustance is otainin# /hen there is a notale disparit$ et/een the eans eplo$ed $ the accused to coit a /ron# and the resultin# crie coitted. (he intention of the accused at the tie of the coission of the crie is anifested fro the /eapon used, the ode of attac eplo$ed and the in