G.R. No. 14643 ; September 8, 1919
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BONIFACIO BISANDRE, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On May 19, 1918, Francisco Sintoarias and his wife, Ruperta Comar, were at a cockpit in Danlogan. At noon, the accused, Bonifacio Bisandre, approached Ruperta and whispered that he would kill her husband. Ruperta had previously lived maritally with Bisandre from 1914 to 1917 before returning to her lawful husband. That evening, as the couple was returning home, Bisandre again approached Ruperta near the Daisog River and repeated his threat. Ruperta warned her husband as they crossed the river. When Francisco reached the other side, Bisandre struck him on the nape of the neck with a fan-palm club, killing him. Bisandre then forced Ruperta to his house under threat of death and instructed her to feign ignorance about the crime. Ruperta complied out of fear, even enlisting a neighbor, Dolores Anducal, to help search for her husband, and only revealed the truth to authorities after Bisandre’s arrest. The trial court convicted Bisandre of murder and sentenced him to death.

ISSUE:
Whether the accused, Bonifacio Bisandre, is guilty of murder qualified by premeditation.

RULING:
Yes, the accused is guilty of murder qualified by premeditation. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The evidence established that Bisandre killed Francisco Sintoarias with evident premeditation. His motive arose from Ruperta’s return to her lawful husband, and his criminal intent was manifested by his repeated threats on the day of the killing. The Court found the qualifying circumstance of treachery (alevosia) not sufficiently proven, as there was doubt regarding the precise manner of the attack. No other aggravating or mitigating circumstances were present. Accordingly, the penalty was reduced from death to cadena perpetua (life imprisonment). The accused was also ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the amount of one thousand pesos (P1,000) and to pay the costs.