G.R. No. 31101 / August 23, 1929
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PEDRO DURANTE, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The defendant, Pedro Durante, was a prisoner serving two sentences for frustrated murder at Bilibid Prison. On January 15, 1929, he stabbed and killed fellow prisoner Mateo Gutierrez. The prosecution’s evidence showed that after an earlier altercation where Gutierrez had punched him, Durante hid a knife used in a Christmas decoration with the intent to kill Gutierrez. On the day of the crime, he first wounded Gutierrez outside the dormitory. Gutierrez then entered the dormitory, where Durante followed and stabbed him again in the abdomen while Gutierrez was leaning on a table, enfeebled. Gutierrez died shortly thereafter. Durante was apprehended while brandishing the knife and made spontaneous admissions to the prison foreman and the Director of Prisons about his premeditated intent to kill. At trial, Durante pleaded guilty, but the court still received evidence to determine the presence of qualifying and aggravating circumstances.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted the defendant of murder, qualified by evident premeditation, and properly imposed the death penalty.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for murder and the imposition of the death penalty.

On the Qualifying Circumstance of Treachery: The Court held that treachery (alevosia) was not proven with respect to the initial attack outside the dormitory, as no witness described how it was executed. While the second attack inside the dormitory on the already wounded and defenseless victim was treacherous, it was considered a continuation of the initial assault. Since the first fatal wound (a stab to the chest) was inflicted without proven treachery, that circumstance could not qualify the killing as murder.

On the Aggravating Circumstance of Evident Premeditation: The Court found evident premeditation sufficiently established. The defendant’s own admissions showed he had conceived the plan to kill Gutierrez after their prior fight, had hidden the knife for that specific purpose weeks before, and carried out the act when the opportunity arose. This demonstrated clear reflection and meditation upon the crime.

On the Admissibility of the Defendant’s Admissions: The Court rejected the defense’s claim that the admissions were inadmissible. The statements to the foreman were made after resistance was overcome and were part of the res gestae. The statements to the Director were made voluntarily without coercion or undue influence.

On the Penalty: The crime was murder under Article 403 of the Penal Code, punishable by cadena temporal in its maximum degree to death. Applying Article 129(1) because the defendant committed the crime while serving sentences for frustrated murder, the penalty was fixed at its maximum degreedeath.

The judgment of the trial court was affirmed in its entirety.