G.R. No. 25587, March 30, 1927
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AGUSTIN CHAN LIN WAT, defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM

FACTS

Agustin Chan Lin Wat (appellant) was convicted of murder and sentenced to death for the killing of Manuel Escarella. The evidence established that Tan Yong, who was under investigation by Escarella for a suspicious warehouse fire, orchestrated a plot to kill Escarella. At a dinner meeting, Tan Yong offered a reward for the killing. Appellant, who was acquainted with Escarella, acted as a decoy to lure him. On the night of September 21, 1925, appellant, along with Tan Yong, Chan Lin Tam, and Lim Sio Chong (the driver), picked up Escarella. After a night of dining and visiting establishments, the group drove to a secluded area near Fort McKinley. There, appellant struck Escarella in the head with a car cranking tool. Escarella was then assaulted by appellant, Tan Yong, and Chan Lin Tam, resulting in his death. Appellant initially gave a written confession admitting his participation but later recanted, claiming his confession was coerced. The trial court found him guilty based on the testimony of accomplice Lim Sio Chong and appellant’s own extrajudicial confession.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant based on the testimony of an accomplice and an alleged coerced confession.
2. Whether the Supreme Court’s decision affirming the death penalty is valid despite the Chief Justice not having participated in the original deliberation.

RULING

1. On the merits of the conviction: The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction. The court found the testimony of Lim Sio Chong to be credible and consistent with the physical evidence. Appellant’s detailed extrajudicial confession (Exhibit D), given voluntarily and corroborated by other evidence, was admissible and constituted strong proof of guilt. His subsequent denial and claim of coercion were unconvincing. The court found the evidence sufficient to establish appellant’s guilt as a principal by direct participation in the murder, which was committed with treachery (*alevosia*).
2. On the validity of the decision: The Supreme Court HELD that its original decision imposing the death penalty was legally valid. At the time of the deliberation, the Chief Justice was on an official leave of absence. Act No. 3104, which requires all members of the court to sign a death penalty decision except those “legally disqualified” (*inhibido legalmente*), was interpreted to mean only those members who are on duty and attending the court’s sessions. A Justice on approved leave is considered “legally disqualified” from participating in the sense of the law. Therefore, the unanimous concurrence of all attending Justices was sufficient. Upon the motion for reconsideration, the Chief Justice, now informed of the record, concurred with the decision, making the Court’s affirmation of the death penalty unanimous.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The judgment of the Court of First Instance was affirmed. Appellant Agustin Chan Lin Wat was sentenced to suffer the penalty of death in the manner prescribed by law. The motion for reconsideration was denied.