People v. Cortaga
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Alfredo Cortaga, Artemio Malinao, and Romeo Yanza, all convicts serving sentences at the New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa, Metro Manila, were charged with Murder for the killing of Jaime Alafriz, another convict. The information alleged conspiracy, intent to kill, evident premeditation, and treachery, with the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism. Procedural History: Upon arraignment, accused Cortaga and Yanza pleaded guilty, while Malinao pleaded not guilty. The trial court proceeded to take testimony to establish guilt and culpability. The evidence presented showed that Cortaga and Yanza were members of the "Batang City Jail" Gang, while Alafriz was a member of the 'Bahala Na' Gang. On June 28, 1977, Cortaga and Yanza encountered Alafriz, who was unarmed, and stabbed him several times with improvised deadly weapons, causing his death. Cortaga's extra-judicial statement indicated that he and Yanza planned the killing the day before due to Alafriz shouting at members of their gang. The autopsy report confirmed multiple stab and incised wounds caused by blunt deadly instruments, with stab wounds penetrating the heart and intestines being the cause of death. The trial court found Cortaga and Yanza guilty of Murder and sentenced them to death, ordering them to indemnify the heirs of the victim. Malinao was acquitted. The Petition: Accused-appellants Cortaga and Yanza appealed the decision, assailing the imposition of the death penalty and contending that the trial court erred in holding that there was evident premeditation and conspiracy, in not considering their spontaneous plea of guilty as a mitigating circumstance, and in sentencing them to death.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in holding that there was evident premeditation and conspiracy in the commission of the offense. Whether the trial court erred in not considering the spontaneous plea of guilty of the two accused to mitigate the offense. Whether the trial court erred in sentencing the two accused to death.
Ruling
The judgment under review is hereby modified in that accused-appellants are hereby sentenced to reclusion perpetua and the indemnity is increased to P30,000.00. Costs against accused-appellants.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of evident premeditation and conspiracy: The Court found that the evidence showed the existence of evident premeditation and conspiracy between appellants Cortaga and Yanza. This was supported by Cortaga's extra-judicial written statement, which clearly indicated that they had planned and scheduled the killing of Alafriz on June 28, 1977. The statement detailed how they discussed killing Alafriz the day before the incident due to Alafriz shouting at members of their gang, and how they subsequently executed the plan. The Court noted that they planned the killing and then carried it out, satisfying the element of evident premeditation. On the issue of the plea of guilty as a mitigating circumstance: The Court held that the assigned errors could not be sustained. While the appellants pleaded guilty, the Court found that the trial court correctly considered the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and quasi-recidivism. The Court stated that the penalty imposable was the maximum penalty of death, without regard to the effect of the mitigating circumstance of the plea of guilty or voluntary surrender. This implies that even with a plea of guilty, the presence of qualifying and aggravating circumstances would still lead to the imposition of the highest penalty. On the issue of the death sentence: The Court affirmed that the crime committed was Murder, qualified by treachery and attended by the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and quasi-recidivism. These circumstances warranted the imposition of the death penalty. However, the Court noted that due to the lack of the necessary votes, the sentence was commuted to reclusion perpetua. The Court also increased the indemnity to P30,000.00.
Main Doctrine
The crime is Murder qualified by treachery and attended by the generic aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation and the special aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism. The penalty thus imposable is the maximum penalty of death without regard to the effect of the mitigating circumstance of accused-appellants' plea of guilty or voluntary surrender. However, due to lack of the necessary votes, the sentence is commuted to reclusion perpetua.