People v. Buyco
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On February 22, 1946, during a dance in Oton, Iloilo, a verbal brawl escalated into a fistfight. Municipal policemen intervened to pacify the fighters. Subsequently, the accused, Meliton Buyco, a Military Policeman, fired two shots from a Thompson submachine gun into the air. Despite being warned by the police chief, Buyco grabbed Apolonio Ikoy, pushed him forward, and fired his submachine gun, killing Ikoy. A bullet from the same discharge also hit Irineo Gellangala, who died instantaneously. Buyco then fired another shot, hitting Napoleon Zambales, who died six days later. Buyco threatened the police chief when the latter attempted to arrest him. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Iloilo convicted Meliton Buyco of triple murder and imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with indemnity to the heirs of the deceased and costs. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision of the trial court.
Issue(s)
Whether the killing of Apolonio Ikoy and Irineo Gellangala, resulting from a single discharge of a submachine gun, constitutes a complex crime. Whether the killing of Napoleon Zambales constitutes a separate crime. Whether the defense of self-defense or defense of a fellow officer was sufficiently proven. Whether the trial court correctly appreciated the aggravating circumstance of treachery.
Ruling
The Supreme Court modified the judgment of the trial court. It convicted the appellant of murder complexed with homicide for the deaths of Apolonio Ikoy and Irineo Gellangala, imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua due to lack of unanimity for the death penalty. The appellant was also convicted of homicide for the death of Napoleon Zambales, with an indeterminate penalty of 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal. The judgment was affirmed in all other respects.
Ratio Decidendi
On the complex crime of murder and homicide for the deaths of Apolonio Ikoy and Irineo Gellangala: The Court held that the single discharge of the submachine gun, which killed both Apolonio Ikoy and Irineo Gellangala, constituted a single act producing two offenses. The killing of Apolonio Ikoy was qualified by treachery, as Buyco grabbed Ikoy by the shoulder, pushed him forward, and fired at his back while his body was moving, thus employing means to insure execution without risk. This qualified the killing as murder. The killing of Irineo Gellangala, who was hit by the same bullet, was classified as homicide, applying the principle that when a wrongful act is committed against one person but injures another, the offender is criminally liable for the voluntary commission of a wrongful act. Pursuant to Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, a single act producing two or more grave or less grave felonies should be punished with the penalty for the more serious offense in its maximum period. Since murder is the more serious offense, the penalty for murder should be imposed. However, due to the lack of unanimity among the Justices for the imposition of the death penalty, the penalty was lowered to reclusion perpetua. On the killing of Napoleon Zambales: The Court found that the death of Napoleon Zambales resulted from another and different shot fired by the appellant from the same gun. This constituted a separate act of homicide. The evidence showed that after the first burst of fire, the appellant changed his position and fired another burst, which hit Napoleon Zambales. This killing was classified as homicide under Article 249 in relation to Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code, as all acts punishable by law are presumed voluntary in the absence of proof to the contrary, and the aggressor is responsible for all consequences of the unlawful act. Since there were no modifying circumstances, the indeterminate penalty of 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal was imposed. On the defense of self-defense or defense of a fellow officer: The Court rejected the defense's version that Apolonio Ikoy attacked Corporal Taleon, wrested his gun, and aimed it at him. The trial judge did not give credit to the testimonies of the defense witnesses, finding inconsistencies and indications of pre-arranged testimony. Specifically, a prior statement made by Corporal Braulio Taleon to the fiscal contradicted the defense's claim that Ikoy had successfully wrested the Thompson submachine gun. The Court found it unlikely that Ikoy, a civilian, would assault an armed officer and attempt to use the officer's weapon against him. The admitted flight of the Military Police after the incident, citing fear of retaliation, was also seen as indicative of a guilty conscience rather than a legitimate performance of duty. Therefore, the defense of self-defense or defense of a fellow officer was not sufficiently established to exculpate the accused. On the aggravating circumstance of treachery: The Court found that treachery qualified the killing of Apolonio Ikoy. The manner in which Buyco grabbed Ikoy, pushed him forward, and fired at his back while his body was moving demonstrated the use of means, methods, or forms directly and specially calculated to insure the execution of the crime without risk to the offender from any defense the offended party might make. This established the presence of treachery, which elevated the killing of Ikoy to murder.
Main Doctrine
A single act producing multiple deaths, one qualified by treachery and the other by homicide, constitutes a complex crime punishable by the penalty for the more serious offense in its maximum period. When the penalty for the more serious offense is death and there is no unanimity among the Justices, the penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua.