G.R. No. 82729 -32 June 15, 1994
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROLANDO VERCHEZ Y BALANE, ROMEO ALDAVE Y TATAD, VIRGILIO BALANE Y ZAPANTA, ALFREDO MAMUNTAG Y CRUZ, HECTOR MAMUNTAG Y ZUNIGA, & GILBERT ANG Y TAN, accused. ROLANDO VERCHEZ y BALANE and ROMEO ALDAVE y TATAD, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On August 15, 1985, a surveillance operation led by PC/INP officers on a suspected bank robbers’ hideout in Bacoor, Cavite, resulted in a shoot-out. The police, after stopping a car driven by accused Virgilio Balane, proceeded to the house. Upon approach, the occupants of the house fired upon the police, triggering a gun battle. Sgt. Monico Norcio was killed, while Cpl. David Noora and PFC Wilfredo Pagsanjan were injured. The occupants—Rolando Verchez, Romeo Aldave, Alfredo Mamuntag, Hector Mamuntag, and Gilbert Ang—eventually surrendered. Confiscated firearms were found to be unlicensed. Verchez and Aldave, in sworn statements, admitted involvement in bank heists and that Verchez fired the first shot. The Regional Trial Court convicted Verchez and Aldave of Murder (for Norcio’s death), Frustrated Murder (for Noora’s injury), and Violation of P.D. 1866 (Illegal Possession of Firearms), and acquitted them of Frustrated Murder for Pagsanjan’s injury. It acquitted the other accused. Verchez and Aldave appealed.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in finding conspiracy among the accused.
2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellants of Murder and Frustrated Murder, qualified by treachery and evident premeditation.
3. Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellants of Illegal Possession of Firearms under P.D. 1866.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision with modifications.
1. On Conspiracy: Conspiracy was sufficiently established. Appellants, armed with unlicensed firearms, collectively resisted arrest by firing at the police officers, demonstrating a community of criminal purpose.
2. On Murder and Frustrated Murder: The qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation were not proven. The attack was not sudden and unexpected, as the police had identified themselves, and the shooting occurred during a legitimate police operation. Evident premeditation requires proof of planning, which was absent. Thus, the crimes are properly Homicide and Frustrated Homicide. The aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank was not considered, as the police were not attacked in the performance of official duties at the time. Appellants were sentenced for Homicide to an indeterminate penalty of 10 years of prision mayor as minimum to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum, with an indemnity of P50,000.00 to Norcio’s heirs. For Frustrated Homicide, the penalty is 3 years of prision correccional as minimum to 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor as maximum.
3. On Illegal Possession of Firearms: The conviction under P.D. 1866 stands. The information sufficiently alleged illegal possession and the resulting homicide. The penalty for the unqualified offense is reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua. With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the medium period applies. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, appellants were sentenced to 17 years, 4 months, and 1 day as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum.
The penalties are to be served in accordance with Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code.