G.R. No. L-55049 February 25, 1985
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFREDO CORTAGA and ROMEO YANZA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Alfredo Cortaga and Romeo Yanza, along with Artemio Malinao, were convicts serving sentences at the New Bilibid Prison. They were charged with Murder for the fatal stabbing of fellow convict Jaime Alafriz on June 28, 1977. The information alleged conspiracy, evident premeditation, treachery, and the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism, as the crime was committed while they were serving final judgments. Upon arraignment, Cortaga and Yanza pleaded guilty, while Malinao pleaded not guilty. The trial court proceeded to receive evidence to establish guilt and determine the degree of culpability.
The prosecution evidence established that appellants and the victim belonged to rival prison gangs. A day before the incident, after Alafriz warned members of another gang, appellants planned to kill him. On June 28, they escaped their dormitory, waylaid the unarmed Alafriz near the prison hospital, and suddenly stabbed him multiple times with improvised weapons, causing his death. Appellants subsequently surrendered the weapons and executed extrajudicial confessions admitting to the stabbing and their prior plan.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court correctly imposed the death penalty upon the accused-appellants.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the penalty. The legal logic proceeds from the classification of the crime and the applicable aggravating circumstances. The killing was qualified as Murder by treachery, as the appellants suddenly attacked the unarmed and unsuspecting victim, ensuring the execution without risk to themselves. The generic aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation was present, substantiated by Cortaga’s extrajudicial confession detailing their agreement to kill Alafriz a day prior and their deliberate execution of the plan. Critically, the special aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism under Article 160 of the Revised Penal Code was also present, as the appellants committed a felony while serving sentence under final judgment.
Under the law, when quasi-recidivism attends the commission of a crime, the penalty for the new offense shall be imposed in its maximum period. For Murder, punishable by reclusion temporal maximum to death, the maximum period is death. The presence of this special aggravating circumstance means that ordinary mitigating circumstances, such as the plea of guilty, cannot offset it to reduce the penalty. Consequently, the strict application of the law warranted the imposition of the death penalty. However, due to the lack of the necessary votes for its imposition, the Court, exercising judicial prerogative, commuted the sentence to reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnity was also increased to Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00).