G.R. No. L-26188, L-26189 and L-26190 January 31, 1974
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO DORIA, accused-appellant. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO DORIA and BARTOLOME LAZARTE, accused-appellants. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BERNABE LAZARTE, accused-appellant.

FACTS

These consolidated appeals stem from three criminal cases originating from a violent incident on November 26, 1959, in Alcala, Pangasinan. The accused, Francisco Doria and his stepsons Bartolome and Bernabe Lazarte, along with other companions, ambushed brothers Martin and Manuel Pasuquin and their brother-in-law, Antonio Reyes, while the victims were on their way to cut grass. The attack was precipitated by a long-standing feud between Doria and the Pasuquin brothers, involving prior accusations of theft and a previous mauling incident.
The prosecution evidence established that Doria, driving a carromata with his group, followed the victims. Upon arrival, Bernabe Lazarte, assisted by Rodolfo Fernandez, stabbed Manuel Pasuquin. Simultaneously, Doria shot Martin Pasuquin in the face with a paltik gun, after which Doria and Bartolome Lazarte chased and repeatedly stabbed him, causing his death. Antonio Reyes was also attacked but managed to escape. Doria was separately charged with illegal possession of a firearm (the paltik used in the killing).

ISSUE

The primary issues were the correctness of the convictions for murder, frustrated murder, and illegal possession of a firearm, and the propriety of the penalties imposed by the trial court.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties. For illegal possession of a firearm (L-26188), the Court corrected the minimum penalty to one year and one day. In the murder case (L-26189), the killing of Martin Pasuquin was correctly qualified by treachery, as the sudden frontal assault ensured the victim had no chance to defend himself. The Court clarified that the penalty for Doria should be designated as reclusion perpetua, not “life imprisonment,” and raised the civil indemnity to P12,000. For Bartolome Lazarte, the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was properly appreciated, and his indeterminate sentence was affirmed.
In the frustrated murder case (L-26190) involving Bernabe Lazarte’s attack on Manuel Pasuquin, the Court also found treachery present. It corrected the maximum penalty to four years, two months, and one day of prision correccional and eliminated the subsidiary imprisonment for the civil indemnity, following the amendment introduced by Republic Act No. 5465. The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy among the accused, evident from their coordinated and simultaneous actions aimed at a common purpose. The appealed judgments were thus affirmed with the specified modifications.