G.R. No. L-27031 May 31, 1974
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LORETO RENEGADO y SENORA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On August 26, 1966, within the premises of the Tiburcio Tancinco Memorial Vocational School in Calbayog City, an altercation occurred between accused-appellant Loreto Renegado, a school clerk, and Mamerto de Lira, a mathematics teacher. Lira requested Renegado to type test questions, a task Renegado refused, claiming it was not his duty. Lira insisted, citing the principal’s instructions, and concluded with a remark that Renegado could finish his work if he would just sit down and work. This provoked Renegado, who angrily boxed a cabinet and left. Lira followed, asking if Renegado was challenging him, but Renegado departed without reply. Subsequently, Renegado told a security guard he would be sad if he could not kill somebody and told another employee, “I am going to kill him.” That evening, Renegado was seen cycling around a school dance, inquiring about Lira’s whereabouts, and was repeatedly advised by colleagues to calm down and think of his family.
On the morning of August 29, Renegado, armed with a double-bladed weapon, confronted Lira, who was conducting a class. Renegado called Lira outside, and upon Lira’s approach, immediately stabbed him in the abdomen. Lira died from the wound on September 4, 1966. The Court of First Instance found Renegado guilty of Murder with assault upon a person in authority and imposed the death penalty. The case is now on automatic review.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused of the complex crime of Murder with assault upon a person in authority.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The killing constituted Murder qualified by treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, giving the victim, who was unarmed and had just stepped out of his classroom, no opportunity to defend himself. This manner of execution directly and specially ensured the accomplishment of the crime without risk to the assailant. Evident premeditation was not established, as the interval between the threat and the killing was insufficient for cool reflection.
The crime is complex under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, as the single act of stabbing constituted both Murder and a Direct Assault upon a person in authority. A public school teacher, like the victim, is deemed a person in authority under Article 152. The assault was committed while the teacher was in the lawful performance of his duties—conducting a class—and with a weapon, aggravating the assault under Article 148. However, the Supreme Court held that the imposition of the death penalty was erroneous. The proper penalty for the complex crime is the maximum period of the penalty for the most serious offense, which is Murder. Under the applicable law, the penalty for Murder is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death. There being no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty should be imposed in its medium period, which is reclusion perpetua. The Court thus modified the sentence to reclusion perpetua, while affirming the indemnity and costs.