People v. Parulan
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Arthur Lee, Chinese name Dy Juat Suy, was the manager of Equitable Trading Company. Gloria Caballero, a widow, met Lee in March 1947 and they lived together. Gloria met Ricardo Parulan and developed a relationship with him. Parulan inquired about Lee's financial status and expressed a desire to kidnap him for ransom, to which Gloria initially laughed, believing it to be a joke. Over two months passed with their relationships continuing. On June 10, 1947, Lee and Gloria had a date. Gloria revealed to Lee that Parulan might kidnap him, which Lee dismissed. Later that night, as Lee drove Gloria home, Parulan, armed with a revolver, appeared and forced Lee to yield his seat to Crisanto Santos. Parulan then ordered Santos to drive to Bocaue. During the drive, Parulan demanded P15,000 from Lee for his life and Gloria's, threatening them. Parulan also physically abused Gloria. At Bambang, Parulan ordered Mariano Natividad, Paulino Natividad, and Abelardo Desiderio to procure a motor banca. Under threat, Zacarias Valerio provided a banca. Parulan, Gloria, Lee, the Natividad brothers, and Santos boarded the banca. Abelardo remained to guard Lee's Packard. On the banca, Parulan continued to mistreat Lee, demanding the ransom. When Lee offered P500, Parulan declared it 'chicken feed' and shot Lee, who fell. Paulino then pushed Lee into the water on Parulan's order. Parulan fired three more shots at Lee. The banca returned to Bocaue, and they transferred to the Packard. The next morning, Parulan, Gloria, and Santos went to Marilao, abandoned the Packard after removing the radio and plates, and proceeded to Manila in a jeep. Lee's decomposed body was found on June 18 in Bambang, Bocaue, Bulacan, with multiple gunshot wounds. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Manila convicted Ricardo Parulan and Gloria Caballero as co-principals of kidnapping with murder, sentencing them to death. Crisanto Santos was convicted as an accomplice to 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal. Mariano Natividad, Paulino Natividad, and Abelardo Desiderio were acquitted. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of First Instance of Manila had jurisdiction over the complex crime of kidnapping with murder. Whether Ricardo Parulan committed the complex crime of kidnapping with murder. Whether Gloria Caballero and Crisanto Santos were co-principals or accomplices in the commission of the crime. Whether the penalty imposed on Ricardo Parulan was correct.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Ricardo Parulan for kidnapping with murder, modifying the penalty to reclusion perpetua. Gloria Caballero and Crisanto Santos were convicted as accomplices, with their sentence affirmed. The acquittal of Mariano Natividad, Paulino Natividad, and Abelardo Desiderio was also affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance of Manila: The Court reiterated its ruling in Parulan vs. Rodas (78 Phil., 855) that the crime charged is the complex crime of kidnapping with murder. It held that any court of first instance where any essential element of the complex crime was committed has jurisdiction. Since the kidnapping was initiated in Manila, the court had jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that the crime is a single complex offense, not two separate crimes, and thus jurisdiction lies where any part of the criminal act transpired. On the commission of kidnapping with murder by Ricardo Parulan: The Court found that the facts clearly demonstrated Parulan kidnapped Lee with the intent to extort P15,000. This intent was evident from the threats and maltreatment inflicted upon Lee and Gloria during the car ride to Bambang, while the banca was being procured, and while on the banca before Lee was shot. The Court concluded that Parulan's motive was to eliminate Lee, who would otherwise reveal the kidnapping. The act of shooting an unarmed man after maltreatment and forcing him to disrobe was deemed to be committed with alevosia (treachery), thus constituting the complex crime of kidnapping with murder. On the liability of Gloria Caballero and Crisanto Santos: The Court disagreed with the trial court's finding of conspiracy between Gloria and Parulan for kidnapping with murder. It reasoned that Gloria's revelation of Parulan's intentions to Lee, and her laughter when Parulan first proposed the kidnapping, indicated she did not have a firm agreement to the crime. The Court found that Gloria and Crisanto followed Parulan's directions not out of irresistible fear but out of blind adherence, making them accomplices. The Court noted that Gloria benefited from Lee's generosity and that Parulan's maltreatment of her contradicted a conspiracy theory. Crisanto Santos was also deemed an accomplice, as he had opportunities to escape or report the crime but remained with Parulan, indicating complicity rather than mere fear. On the penalty imposed on Ricardo Parulan: The Court acknowledged that under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 18, the penalty for kidnapping with murder is reclusion perpetua to death. However, due to the composition of the Court and the fact that the crime occurred before Republic Act No. 296 (which requires eight votes for the death penalty), the Court could not unanimously impose the death penalty. Consequently, by operation of law, the immediately lower penalty, reclusion perpetua, was imposed on Parulan. The penalty for Gloria Caballero and Crisanto Santos as accomplices was affirmed.
Main Doctrine
The complex crime of kidnapping with murder is cognizable by any court of first instance where any essential element of the complex crime was committed. The penalty for kidnapping with murder, under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 18, is reclusion perpetua to death. When the commission of the crime occurred prior to the approval of Republic Act No. 296, and eight votes are not met for the imposition of the death penalty, the immediately lower penalty, reclusion perpetua, shall be imposed.