G.R. No. 32039 , February 26, 1930
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. ESTEBAN CARANDANG, ET AL.

FACTS

In the afternoon of the incident, appellant Marciano Marco, a cloth peddler, went to the house of Perfecto Magante in Romblon to sell cloth. Perfecto Magante, who was eating, told him to leave as they had no money. Marciano insisted the cloth was cheap, prompting Juan Magante (Perfecto’s son) to ask the price of a blanket. Marciano quoted ₱8.50 but said it could be lower. Juan offered only ₱2, leading Marciano to insult him. Juan responded by punching Marciano in the mouth, causing him to fall. Marciano then fled, leaving his cloth behind.

Later, Juan Magante sat on a sidewalk, possibly expecting Marciano to return with a policeman. Marciano returned with a crowd and struck Juan with a cane, but Juan parried the blow. They grappled, fell to the ground, and rolled into a ditch. At this point, appellant Esteban Carandang attacked Juan from behind with a knife, intending to stab him but instead accidentally wounded Marciano in the neck. Esteban then stabbed Juan in the back while Juan was still struggling with Marciano on the ground. Juan sustained two fatal back wounds and died the next morning.

The prosecution alleged that appellant Pedro Marco also participated in the attack, but evidence on his involvement was insufficient. The trial court convicted all three appellants of murder. Esteban Carandang and Pedro Marco were sentenced to life imprisonment, while Marciano Marco, who was 16 years old at the time of the crime, was sentenced to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal. All were ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased jointly and severally.

ISSUE

1. Whether the qualifying circumstance of treachery (alevosía) attended the killing of Juan Magante.
2. Whether the appellants are all liable for murder.
3. Whether the minority of Marciano Marco affects his criminal liability.

RULING

1. Treachery is present but only as to Esteban Carandang. The Court found that Esteban Carandang attacked Juan Magante from behind with a knife while Juan was on the ground struggling with Marciano Marco, unable to defend himself. This manner of attack ensured the execution of the crime without risk to Esteban, constituting treachery, which qualifies the killing as murder. However, treachery cannot be imputed to Marciano Marco because he did not begin his attack treacherously; the fight between him and Juan started with a direct confrontation.

2. Liability varies per appellant:
– Esteban Carandang is guilty of murder. The Court affirmed his conviction and life imprisonment sentence, as treachery was present in his actions and no modifying circumstances attended the crime.
– Pedro Marco is acquitted. The evidence failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he participated in the attack.
– Marciano Marco is not guilty of murder. Since treachery is not attributable to him, the crime cannot be qualified as murder. Given his age (16 years old at the time of the crime), Act No. 3203 (the Child Welfare Law) applies. Criminal proceedings against him are suspended, and he is placed in the custody of the Public Welfare Commissioner until he reaches the age of majority.

3. Minority of Marciano Marco: The Court applied Act No. 3203 , which mandates the suspension of criminal proceedings against minors and their commitment to the custody of welfare authorities.

DISPOSITIVE:
The judgment of the trial court is:
– Affirmed as to Esteban Carandang, with one-third of the costs.
– Modified as to Marciano Marco: criminal proceedings are suspended, and he is placed under the custody of the Public Welfare Commissioner.
– Reversed as to Pedro Marco: he is acquitted, with one-third of the costs de oficio.