G.R. No. L-1292; May 24, 1948
People of the Philippines vs. Domingo Mobe (alias Doming), et al.

FACTS

Domingo Mobe was convicted of murder for the killing of watchman Emilio Deiparine during an attempted robbery of a drugstore. The prosecution evidence, primarily from police testimony, established that Mobe and his companions planned to rob the store. When the watchman confronted them, one accomplice, Juan Saldo, grappled with him, and Mobe and another cohort then shot the watchman, who was defenseless at that moment. Saldo was also wounded and later died. Mobe was arrested fleeing from a house indicated by Saldo, with muddy feet, and he led police to his co-accused, Leonardo Camoro. Camoro, convicted as an accomplice, gave a written confession implicating Mobe. Mobe’s defense was an alibi and a denial of the accusations, which the court found weak and uncorroborated.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted Domingo Mobe of murder.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is affirmed. The Supreme Court found sufficient evidence, independent of the contested confessions of Saldo and Camoro, to prove Mobe’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This evidence included Mobe’s flight upon arrest, his indication leading to Camoro’s arrest, and his own admission to police about hiding a firearm. The crime was murder qualified by treachery (alevosia), as the fatal shots were fired while the watchman was being held and rendered defenseless. The Court modified the penalty from “imprisonment for life” to reclusion perpetua to use proper legal terminology, noting that the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and abuse of superior strength were absorbed by treachery, and the aggravating circumstance of band was not proven. Thus, with no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was proper.

AI Generated by Armztrong.