G.R. No. L-4527
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiffs-appellee, vs. CLEMEMTE ROQUE, defendant-appellant.
October 9, 1908

FACTS: On the early morning of June 23, 1904, four armed individuals, including Clemente Roque, appeared at the houses of Florencio Lobo and Sinfroso Ramos in Lubao, Pampanga. Pretending to be agents of the authorities, they ordered the men out. Lobo and Ramos were seized, tied up, and taken to the fields. Roque was recognized by five eyewitnesses, carrying a gun and wearing a black shirt and red trousers. Later that same day, the headless bodies of Lobo and Ramos, covered with wounds, were discovered in the fields of Guagua.

A complaint for double murder was filed against Roque. He was initially convicted in August 1905. However, on appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment and remanded the case for a new trial because the stenographic notes of the first trial were destroyed in a fire. In the new trial (August 1907), Roque was again convicted and sentenced to cadena perpetua, P1,000 indemnity to each family, and costs. He appealed again, presenting an alibi based on a leg wound he sustained in a previous quarrel and arguing double jeopardy. The prosecution presented consistent eyewitness testimony identifying Roque as one of the abductors.

ISSUE: 1. Whether Clemente Roque is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the double murder of Florencio Lobo and Sinfroso Ramos.
2. Whether the violent deaths constituted murder due to treachery, and if aggravating circumstances were present.
3. Whether the new trial ordered by the Supreme Court, following the destruction of trial records, constituted double jeopardy.

RULING: The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction of Clemente Roque for the double crime of murder, but MODIFIED the penalty to death.

1. Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt: The Court found Roque’s participation proven beyond reasonable doubt. Five eyewitnesses consistently identified him as one of the armed individuals who abducted the victims. The alibi presented by Roque, based on a leg wound, was discredited due to contradictory witness testimony and evidence that he was able to walk around the time of the crime. The Court also noted that Sinfroso Ramos, upon being accosted, had expressed concern about his enemy, Clemente Roque, suggesting a motive of revenge. The Court concluded that the abductors were also the murderers.

2. Qualification as Murder and Aggravating Circumstances: The Court ruled that the violent deaths constituted double murder due to the qualifying circumstance of treachery (alevosia). The victims were tied up and defenseless when abducted, and the Court inferred that they were killed in this helpless state, which ensured the perpetrators’ safety from any defense. Furthermore, the Court found the presence of generic aggravating circumstances: cunning and fraud (by pretending to be authorities), nighttime, and taking advantage of the silence and darkness of night. No mitigating circumstances were found.

3. Double Jeopardy: The Court rejected the argument of double jeopardy. It held that the Supreme Court, having full jurisdiction over the case on appeal, had the power to order a new trial when the records (stenographic notes) of the original trial were destroyed, as this was necessary to cure the lack of evidence for a proper review. This action was consistent with procedural law and jurisprudence (citing United States vs. Quilatan, 4 Phil. Rep., 481).

Given the presence of qualifying treachery and several aggravating circumstances without any mitigating ones, the Court applied the maximum penalty, sentencing Clemente Roque to death, with accessory penalties and indemnification to the victims’ heirs.