G.R. No. L-5346; January 30, 1953
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO AGUILANDO, FELICISIMO ENERO, RUFINO MALOBAGO, and PEDRO CAGRO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On the afternoon of May 12, 1948, in Barrio Bugco, Municipality of Mondragon, Samar, Victor de los Reyes arrived at the house of Genoveva Malobago with a wounded companion, Alfredo Aliposa, whom Victor had previously injured. Victor and another companion, Remigio Mananguete, left to borrow a bicycle to fetch a Sanitary Inspector. After they left, Arquilao Marino, Bonifacio Arneo, and Julio Custorio arrived. Upon learning Aliposa was wounded by Victor, Arquilao declared, “Let us go and run after him because we will fight him and we will not forgive him,” and they left. Later, on the provincial road, Victor and Remigio met appellants Felicisimo Enero, Pedro Cagro, and Bonifacio Arneo. Francisco Aguilando and Rufino Malobago then appeared. Aguilando accused Victor of being a bully from Catarman and, without waiting for a reply, struck him. When Victor tried to retaliate but hit Malobago instead, Cagro struck Victor from behind, causing him to fall. Victor fled but was pursued and overtaken by the four appellants near a Chinese store. There, they collectively attacked him: Enero hit his head with a wooden club; Cagro mounted him, struck him, and stabbed his face with a weapon; Malobago struck his thigh with a wooden pestle. Victor died from his injuries, which included a fractured skull and brain concussion. The defense claimed self-defense, alleging Victor initiated the attack with a knife, but the trial court rejected this version.

ISSUE

Whether the appellants are guilty of murder, considering the presence of conspiracy, the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, and the absence of mitigating circumstances such as passion and obfuscation.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the guilt of the appellants for murder but modified the penalty. The Court found conspiracy existed, as shown by Arquilao’s prior invitation to attack Victor and the appellants’ simultaneous and coordinated aggression. The qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present, as four armed appellants attacked an unarmed and alone Victor. The mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation was not applicable, as several hours had passed since Victor wounded Aliposa, and Victor was seen trying to aid Aliposa, allowing time for cooling off. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua for each appellant, with joint and several indemnity to the heirs of Victor de los Reyes in the amount of P6,000.