FIRST
DIVISION
THE
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
G.
R.
No. 33843
February
11, 1931
-versus-
JUAN
AGUINALDO,
Defendant-Appellant.
D
E C I S I
O N
VILLAMOR,
J :
The accused was tried for
the crime of murder by the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte on
the
following Information:
"That on or about the
29th of April, 1930, in the municipality of Bacarra, Province of Ilocos
Norte, Philippine Islands, the above-named accused did wilfully,
unlawfully,
and feloniously kill one named Anselmo Oao, with a bolo, the crime
being
committed in an uninhabited place, with evident premeditation,
treachery,
and cruelty.
"Contrary to law."
At the preliminary investigation
the defendant pleaded guilty before the Justice of the Peace of
Bacarra,
but in the Court of First Instance he pleaded not guilty.
After both parties
had submitted their evidence, the Court found the defendant guilty of
murder
with the qualifying circumstance of treachery, and the aggravating
circumstances
of cruelty and uninhabited place, and sentenced him to life
imprisonment,
with the accessories of law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in
the sum of P1,000 and to pay the costs.
The defendant has
appealed
to this Court and his counsel contends that the trial court erred in
convicting
him of murder, when the evidence of record only supports a conviction
of
homicide.
The record shows that
the deceased Anselmo Oao and his wife, Geronima Lacar, lived at the
place
called Rango, in the municipality of Bacarra; that on the morning of
April
29, 1930, husband and wife went to a hill in Rango to dig up some roots
to be used as medicine for Geronima's toothache. While the deceased was
in a sort of gully at the hillside, stooping down and digging up the
roots,
the defendant appeared and suddenly rushed at him, stabbing him in the
neck with his bolo from behind. When he felt the blow, the victim tried
to raise his head saying, "Apo, what are you going to do to me?"
Geronima, in turn, demanded of the defendant: "What have you done to my
husband?" But the defendant continued attacking the deceased, who was
unarmed,
and threatened to kill Geronima if she reported him. She fled terrified
to her house. Still in fear of the defendant, Geronima told no one what
had happened until the next day, when she hinted to her father and a
neighbor
that they might look for the deceased on that hill.
The body was found,
and the authorities of Bacarra notified; and on the night of the 30th
of
that month, April, the justice of the peace, the chief of police, and
the
president of the sanitary division including said municipality of
Bacarra
went to the place. The last named official, Dr. Mauricio Paz, made an
autopsy
and mentioned the following wounds in the certificate he issued:
"(a) One on the back
of the right wrist, four inches long, cutting all the muscles, bones,
and
vessels of that region, and leaving only the flesh of the palm
unsevered
from the body.
"(b) Two wounds in
the chest four inches long parallel to each other and to the sternum
[bone],
situated on the borders of said bone, and taking in the flesh, muscles,
ribs, vessels, and both lungs.
"(c) One wound on the
right side of the neck, ten inches long, from the right border of the
sternum
near the nape of the neck; four inches deep and three inches wide,
taking
in all the muscles, vessels, and nerves of that region and a part of
the
occiput.
"(d) Another wound
on the right cheek from the chin back behind the right ear, taking in
the
muscles, vessels, and bones of the region; the right ear has not been
found,
for it was severed from the head.
"(e) Another wound
on the head eight inches long from the forehead to the nape of the
neck,
dividing the cranium in two, taking in the scalp, the cranial bones,
and
the brain.
"(f) Another wound
underneath the right eye, two and a half inches long, taking in the
soft
parts and bones of that region.
"(g) The forehead
shows
a surface wound, round and about two and a half inches in diameter,
only
skin-deep; the frontal bone is exposed.
"4. The wounds
designated
by letters (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) are necessarily mortal.
"5. These wounds were
produced by a sharp instrument.
"6. Death was due to
the excitement and hemorrhage caused by these wounds."
The
defendant voluntarily
made the Sworn Statement, Exhibit B, before the Justice of the Peace of
Bacarra and in the presence of the Municipal President and the Chief of
Police, declaring in substance that he had illicit relations with
Geronima
Lacar, the wife of the deceased, for a month before the incident; that
the day before the 29th of April, Geronima urged him to kill Anselmo
Oao;
that he, therefore, killed Anselmo on that morning, while the latter
was
stooping, digging up roots in Rango; that on receiving the first slash,
Anselmo confronted him, but fell upon being stabbed again; that no one
witnessed the act except Geronima, who, after seeing her husband
stabbed
twice, ran away to her house. The defendant further admitted that the
bolo,
Exhibit C, was the weapon he had used upon the deceased, and that the
shirt,
Exhibit D, and the drawers, Exhibit D-1, were the dead man's clothing
on
the occasion in question.
The Justice of the
Peace testified in the case, identifying Exhibit B, which is the Sworn
Statement made by the defendant before him, as already stated, and in
the
presence of the Municipal President and the Chief of Police. The
Municipal
President fully corroborates the testimony of the Justice of the Peace.
The trial court, by
an order dated May 5, 1930, delegated the Justice of the Peace of
Laoag,
capital of the Province of Ilocos Norte, to conduct the preliminary
investigation
in each of the two Informations against Geronima Lacar and against Juan
Aguinaldo, respectively. And this Justice of the Peace testified,
identifying
Exhibit E, where defendant Juan Aguinaldo also pleads guilty.
In testifying, Dr.
Mauricio Paz, president of the second sanitary division, after
describing
the wounds he found upon Anselmo Oao's body, said that they found the
body
on the hillside, in a hole about 1 meter deep. The body was placed face
downward, with the head a little inclined to the left. The left hand
was
under the head, and the right hand on the abdomen. It was dressed in a
shirt and short drawers, and was beginning to decompose.
The defendant testified
in his own behalf that he came upon the deceased that morning as he was
looking for the cattle he pastured. Without even knowing him, the
deceased
said to him: "You come here to look for something to rob." The accused
answered that he was only looking for his cattle, but the deceased ran
after him with a drawn bolo. In view of the deceased's aggressive
attitude,
he was compelled to fight, for he had reached an impassable place and
could
not flee. He then stabbed the deceased, who was more robust than he,
wounding
him in the neck. Without realizing what he was doing, he continued to
stab
the deceased, who fought back until he sank down seriously wounded. He
denies that he has threatened the dead man's wife, saying that she was
not present on that occasion.
The defendant also
testifies that the constabulary men arrested him in his house, tied his
hands, and bound him because he refused to confess; that during the
investigation
which they conducted, he only admitted that he had caused the
deceased's
death; that this admission of his was reported by the constabulary men
to the Justice of the Peace of Bacarra, who reduced it to writing,
later
on making him sign Exhibit B in the presence of the constabulary men;
and
that some time later, he was also taken by the constabulary men before
the Justice of the Peace of Laoag, who drew up a document and made him
sign it, without giving him an opportunity to secure counsel. But the
defendant
admitted on cross-examination, that the Justice of the Peace of Bacarra
investigated him and reduced to writing what he had testified, and he
signed
it, declaring at the same time that it was true; that later on, when
already
in the provincial jail, the provincial fiscal read out to him in
Ilocano
the Sworn Statement he had made before the Justice of the Peace of
Bacarra,
and he again affirmed under oath that it was true; and that he did not
tell the fiscal that he had been maltreated by the constabulary men,
because
the latter were then present.
After examining the
record, We are fully convinced that the defendant is guilty beyond a
reasonable
doubt. It will be noted that the accused, in testifying before the
trial
court, makes no mention of the alleged instigation of the deceased's
wife
to commit the crime; but even supposing that such instigation existed,
there is absolutely no reason why the defendant should be exempted from
criminal liability for the treacherous killing of Anselmo Oao. The dead
man's position when he received the first blow, with his back to the
defendant
and bent down, because he was digging up medical roots in a gully,
entirely
unprepared and unable to defend himself from his assailant, clearly
shows
the defendant's treachery in attacking his victim, thereby qualifying
the
crime as murder, defined and penalized in Article 403 of the Penal Code.
The defendant's
allegation
that he was pursued by the deceased and being unable to flee, he turned
to bay bolo in hand, is, to Our way of thinking, an invention pure and
simple on the part of the defendant, which the trial court did not
believe,
and neither do We.
The trial court
accepted
as aggravating circumstances, cruelty and uninhabited place. The
Attorney-General
holds that the number of wounds found upon the corpse does not, by
itself
alone, justify the acceptance of the circumstance of cruelty, it being
necessary to show that he deliberately and inhumanly increased the
sufferings
of the victim, and this has not been proved in the present case. The
Attorney-General
also alleges that the circumstance of uninhabited place cannot properly
be accepted, for lack of evidence to show that the appellant sought the
solitude of the place where the crime was committed in order the better
to attain his purpose. We agree with the Attorney-General. The evidence
does not clearly show that the place was about 1 kilometer away from
the
nearest house.
Considering all the
circumstances of the present case, We are of opinion that the judgment
appealed from, imposing the penalty of life imprisonment on the
defendant,
which penalty is the medium degree of that fixed in Article 403 of the
Penal Code for the crime of murder, is in accordance with law. It must
therefore be affirmed, as we do hereby affirm it, with costs against
the
appellant. So ordered.
Avanceña, C.J.,
Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Ostrand, Johns, Romualdez and Villa-Real, JJ.,
concur. |