G.R. No. L-23708; October 31, 1968
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SOCORRO MONGAYA and FELIPE MONGAYA, alias JOSE MONGAYA, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On September 3, 1963, in Barrio Lipata, Allen, Samar, defendants-appellants Socorro Mongaya and Felipe Mongaya, who harbored ill feelings towards the Garcia family, asked Juan Briones if he had seen Santos Garcia. Socorro stated they would kill Santos if they found him. Later, around 6:00 PM, Briones witnessed Socorro stabbing Santos Garcia in the chest with a long-pointed weapon while Felipe held Santos by the left arm near a banana hill. Briones fled and saw Santos staggering towards his brother Angel’s house, pursued by the appellants. Angel Garcia, Jr. heard his brother Santos declare he was stabbed by Socorro and Felipe. Angel then saw the appellants on his stairs, with Socorro holding a blood-stained weapon. Barrio Lieutenant Jose Macabare arrived, and Santos, before being taken to the hospital, verbally identified his assailants to Macabare, who had Angel write down the declaration which Santos thumbmarked. Santos died from six stab wounds. The trial court found both defendants guilty of murder without discussing legal reasons for conspiracy or evident premeditation.

ISSUE

The issues for determination are: (1) whether there was conspiracy between the appellants; (2) whether there was evident premeditation; and (3) the correctness of the trial court’s finding of treachery.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modifications. It held that conspiracy existed, as the appellants’ concerted acts—Socorro’s expressed intent to kill, their joint search for the victim, Felipe holding Santos during the stabbing, and their joint pursuit—showed previous concert of criminal design. Evident premeditation was present, as the appellants had sufficient time for reflection between their declared intent and the killing. Treachery was correctly found because Santos, held by Felipe and unarmed, could not defend himself, ensuring no risk to the appellants. The defense of alibi was rejected. The qualifying circumstance of treachery elevated the killing to murder, with evident premeditation considered as a generic aggravating circumstance. For Socorro, who was 18, the penalty should technically be death, but due to lack of necessary votes, reclusion perpetua was imposed. For Felipe, who was 17, a privileged mitigating circumstance under Article 68(2) of the Revised Penal Code applied, warranting a penalty one degree lower. His sentence was modified to an indeterminate penalty of 10 years of prision mayor to 15 years of reclusion temporal. Compensatory damages were increased from P6,000 to P12,000.