G.R. Nos. L-9866-7; November 28, 1964
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JULIAN TIONGSON Y DE LA CRUZ, ET AL., defendants; PAULINO GUIEB Y MENDOZA, WILSON ALICANTE Y MORALES, ANTONIO YACAT Y BELMONTE and PABLO ANTONIO Y FERIA, defendant-appellants.

FACTS

The defendants, including four appellant soldiers (Guieb, Alicante, Yacat, Antonio) and a civilian (Tiongson), were charged with the murders of brothers Rizalino and Mariano Lopez, Jr. The victims, along with their brother Ramon and cousin Pacifico Arceo, went to the residence of their sister, Mrs. Sayo, on Halcon Street, Quezon City, on June 26, 1952, to borrow money for medicine. The appellants, then soldiers, were assigned as security guards at the Sayo residence due to prior rumors of trouble. Upon arrival, Ramon entered the house while Rizalino waited outside. Tiongson, a civilian guard, later confronted Rizalino, and was joined by Ramon and Mariano Jr. Tiongson, with another armed man named “German,” herded the four unarmed visitors into the street and called for the soldiers. A sudden volley of shots ensued, killing Rizalino and Mariano Jr.
The police investigation recovered multiple firearms and cartridge cases at the scene. The prosecution’s eyewitnesses, Ramon Lopez and Pacifico Arceo, identified Tiongson, German, and the four appellant soldiers as the perpetrators. At trial, appellants Yacat and Antonio denied participation, claiming they were guarding the rear of the house and did not fire their weapons. Appellants Guieb and Alicante admitted firing but claimed they acted in self-defense, believing they were under attack from unidentified figures in the dark.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether all appellants conspired to commit the murders; (2) whether the qualifying circumstances of treachery and abuse of superior strength were present; and (3) whether the aggravating circumstance of a band was properly applied.

RULING

The Supreme Court acquitted appellants Yacat and Antonio. The prosecution’s own ballistic evidence showed that the firearms issued to them had not been fired, corroborating their defense that they were stationed at the rear and did not participate in the shooting. Without proof of direct participation or conspiracy, their guilt was not established beyond reasonable doubt.
However, the Court affirmed the conviction of appellants Guieb and Alicante. Their claim of self-defense was rejected. The evidence established that the victims were unarmed, with their hands raised in surrender, and were herded into the street in plain view before the sudden shooting. This manner of attack constituted treachery, as it was executed suddenly to ensure the victims could not defend themselves. The circumstance of abuse of superior strength was absorbed by treachery. The offense was aggravated by being committed by a band, as more than three armed individuals (Tiongson, German, Guieb, and Alicante) acted together. A mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was credited to Guieb and Alicante, offsetting the aggravating circumstance. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each murder was thus affirmed. They, along with Tiongson, were held solidarily liable for civil indemnity.