G.R. No. L-24484 May 28, 1968
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAMON NARCISO Y CONTRERAS, ET AL., defendants, RUFINO PEÑA Y GUEVARRA, defendant on review.

FACTS

The case is an automatic review of a murder conviction where accused Rufino Peña y Guevarra was sentenced to death. The accused, along with Ramon Narciso, Elias Gloria, and Francisco Celso, were charged with the murder of fellow detainee Roberto Monreal y Calbario inside Cell 2-A of the Manila City Jail on July 10, 1961. The information alleged killing with intent, evident premeditation, treachery, and use of superior strength. All pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s evidence included the testimony of eyewitness Bernardo Villalon, a fellow prisoner, who testified that he saw accused Elias Gloria beat the prostrate victim with a piece of wood. Villalon also testified that before the attack, he saw Gloria and Peña whispering and Peña pointing at the victim. The prosecution also presented extrajudicial confessions from the accused, which the defense objected to as hearsay but were admitted. During trial, the case against Francisco Celso was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence; Elias Gloria escaped; and Ramon Narciso died, leaving Rufino Peña as the sole remaining accused. Peña testified in his defense, denying participation and repudiating his confession, claiming it was extracted through maltreatment.

ISSUE

The primary issue for review is the correctness of the conviction for murder and the imposition of the death penalty upon accused Rufino Peña.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the decision of the trial court. It held that the extrajudicial confession of Rufino Peña was inadmissible as evidence against him because it was not made voluntarily, having been obtained while he was under arrest without a warrant and without being informed of his right to remain silent and to counsel. The Court found that the only admissible evidence against Peña was the testimony of eyewitness Bernardo Villalon. However, Villalon’s testimony only positively identified Elias Gloria as the one who beat the victim; it did not sufficiently establish that Peña conspired with or participated in the killing. The Court ruled that the evidence only proved that Peña was present and pointed at the victim before the attack, which is insufficient to convict him as a principal in the crime of murder. Consequently, the Court found Peña guilty only of the lesser crime of attempted murder, as his acts constituted an attempt to commit murder through overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, which was not consummated due to the intervention of the eyewitness. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was present, but evident premeditation and use of superior strength were not proven. The penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of prision correccional to eight (8) years of prision mayor, and he was ordered to pay indemnity to the victim’s heirs.