G.R. No. L-36882-84 July 24, 1981
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAURO VERGES, ET AL., accused, GAVINO LUCAS, SIMPLICIO OCAMPO, ADRIANO VILLARUEL, PABLITO ECHAVEZ, ERNEST TORRES, MARIANO GUEVARRA, SANTIAGO POMIDA, FEDERICO PARIENTE, FORTUNATO CASILLAR, PABLO REYES and BRIGIDO LAMBINO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

This case involves the automatic review of death sentences imposed on multiple appellants for three counts of murder. The charges stemmed from a violent incident on May 4, 1969, inside the New Bilibid Prisons in Muntinlupa, Rizal, arising from gang rivalry between the Sigue-Sigue Sputnik and Sigue-Sigue Commando. During the incident, three inmates belonging to the Sputnik gang—Alberto Rubiso, Pedro Trijo, and Jaime Caballero—were killed. Separate but identical Informations for murder were filed against numerous accused, alleging conspiracy, treachery, evident premeditation, and the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism, as the acts were committed while the accused were serving sentences.
After trial, the lower court convicted the appellants. Several accused changed their pleas to guilty after the prosecution rested. Appellant Brigido Lambino maintained his plea of not guilty but was convicted based on his written confessions, which the court found to be voluntarily given. The trial court sentenced each appellant to death for each of the three murders. The cases were elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review.

ISSUE

The primary issue for review is the correctness of the convictions and the propriety of imposing the death penalty for the three counts of murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions for three counts of murder for each appellant but modified the penalty. The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy among the appellants in carrying out the coordinated attacks. The killings were qualified by treachery, as the victims were suddenly and unexpectedly assaulted with deadly weapons, depriving them of any chance to defend themselves. The Court also affirmed the presence of the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism under Article 160 of the Revised Penal Code, as the crimes were committed by persons already serving final sentences.
However, the Court rejected the finding of evident premeditation, noting a lack of clear proof of the time when the appellants determined to commit the crime or an act manifestly indicating such determination. The Court also did not appreciate the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, as the subsequent surrender of weapons by some appellants in their own dormitory was not considered analogous to a spontaneous surrender to authorities.
While the crimes warranted severe penalties, the Court, voting en banc, could not affirm the death sentences due to the lack of the required number of votes. Some members of the Court considered the sub-human and brutalizing conditions prevailing in the New Bilibid Prisons at the time as a significant factor militating against the imposition of the supreme penalty. Consequently, the death sentences were reduced. The dispositive portion of the decision modified the trial court’s judgments by sentencing each appellant to three separate penalties of reclusion perpetua for the three murders, and affirmed the judgments in all other respects.