People v. Aguilando
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: At approximately 5:00 p.m. on May 12, 1948, Victor de los Reyes arrived at the house of Geneveva Malobago and laid Alfredo Aliposa, whom he had previously wounded, on a mat. Victor and his companion Remigio Mananguete left to borrow a bicycle to fetch a Sanitary Inspector. After they left, Arquilao Marino, Bonifacio Arneo, and Julio Custorio arrived. Upon learning of Aliposa's wounding by Victor, Arquilao stated, "Let us go and run after him because we will fight him and we will not forgive him." Genoveva, fearing trouble, asked Aliposa to leave and secured the house. Victor and Remigio returned, finding the bicycle out of order. On their way back on the provincial road, they encountered Felicisimo Enero, Pedro Cargo, and Bonifacio Arneo. Enero inquired about their destination, and Victor replied they were going to Mondragon. Francisco Aguilando and Rufino Malobago then appeared. Aguilando confronted Victor about being a "pillo" (bully) and making advances towards women without consequence due to fear. Without waiting for a response, Aguilando struck Victor. Victor attempted to retaliate but hit Rufino Malobago instead. Pedro Cargo struck Victor from behind below the left ear, causing him to fall. Victor fled but was pursued by Aguilando, Malobago, Enero, and Cargo. Victor was overtaken near a Chinese store, where his pursuers attacked him. Enero hit Victor with a wooden club on the head, causing him to fall. Cargo mounted Victor, seized his neck, and delivered numerous fistic blows. Cargo then pulled out a weapon and thrust it into Victor's face. Malobago struck Victor's thigh with a wooden pestle. After these simultaneous aggressions, the four assailants left Victor on the ground. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Samar found the appellants guilty of murder, considering the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, and sentenced them to ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, with indemnity and costs. The case was appealed to the Court of Appeals, where the Special Division concluded that the appellants were guilty of murder with the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, without any mitigating or aggravating generic circumstances, and should be punished with reclusion perpetua. The case was forwarded to the Supreme Court. The Petition: The appellants appealed their conviction.
Issue(s)
Whether there was conspiracy among the defendants to commit the crime. Whether the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present. Whether the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation was applicable. Whether the appellants were guilty of murder and the appropriate penalty.
Ruling
The judgment appealed from is modified. Each of the four appellants is imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua. They are ordered to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P6,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the existence of conspiracy: The Court found that conspiracy or concerted action was evident. This was demonstrated by Arquilao's invitation to his companions to confront and fight Victor. Furthermore, the simultaneous and cooperative assault by the four appellants on the unarmed and alone Victor, using fists, a knife, clubs, and a bamboo post, coupled with the prior invitation, unequivocally established conspiracy or concerted action among the defendants. As per the ruling in People v. Carbonel, et al., when conspiracy is proven, each defendant is held responsible for the acts of the others. On the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength: The Court held that the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was clearly present in the commission of the crime. The evidence showed that four individuals, armed with various weapons, collectively attacked Victor, who was alone and unarmed. This disparity in force and numbers, where the assailants acted in concert to overwhelm the victim, constitutes abuse of superior strength. On the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation: The Court disagreed with the trial court's finding of passion and obfuscation as a mitigating circumstance. It reasoned that Alfredo Aliposa had been wounded several hours prior to the incident, and Victor was actively attempting to provide medical attention by laying him on a mat and seeking a Sanitary Inspector. This indicated that Victor was no longer in a state of aggression towards Alfredo and that any perceived offense had occurred long before the fatal encounter. The Court concluded that the defendants had ample time to cool down, especially given Victor's actions in tending to Alfredo, thus negating the element of sudden passion or obfuscation. On the guilt of the appellants and the appropriate penalty: The Court affirmed the guilt of the appellants for murder. It found that the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present and that no mitigating circumstances applied. Consequently, the penalty for murder, which is reclusion perpetua, was imposed. The indemnity to the heirs of the deceased was increased to P6,000, reflecting the gravity of the offense. The Court also clarified that subsidiary imprisonment would not apply in case of insolvency for the civil indemnity.
Main Doctrine
Conspiracy or concerted action is shown by the fact that Arquilao invited his companions to fight Victor, and the circumstance that the four appellants, simultaneously and helping each other, assailed Victor with their fist, a knife, clubs and bamboo post, Victor being unarmed and alone. These simultaneous acts of aggression plus the previous invitation by Arquilao to find and attack Victor, show beyond doubt that there was conspiracy or concerted action among the defendants. The qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was clearly present. There could have been no mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, because Alfredo was wounded several hours before and Victor was even trying to lay him on a mat and call a Sanitary Inspector to treat him. Victor was already on good terms with Alfredo. Even if passion and obfuscation had been felt by the defendants, they had time to cool off especially when they saw Victor trying to take care of Alfredo.