AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

People v. Pantoja

Facts: At 1:30 am A group of serenaders went to the house of Estelita and an unvited Philippine
Army Sergeant also went with the group and while Mr. Hernandez who was then seated beside
Estelita was asked by the sergeant Mr. Pantoja if he could be seated beside her but the former
denied the request. Mr. Pantoja left without notice and no sign of anger was seen on him when
he got out the house. At around 2 am, the group left the house and without the group knowing,
they were followed by Mr. Pantoja who was then armed with rifle at a short distance and Mr.
Pantoja called out “Ano yan? Ano yan?” and fired two shots inflicting wounds to Marasigan and
Hernandez. Pantoja went near the them and fired one shot and four shots on the bodies of
Marasigan and Hernandez, respectively.
Issues: WON there is an evident premeditation?
Ruling: NO. The court said the appellant only had about half an hour for meditation and
reflection from the time he left the house, went to his camp, put on his fatigue uniform, followed
the group, and then fired two shots. The time in circumstances was insufficient for full meditation
and reflection. It was insufficient, in juridical sense, for his conscience to overcome the
resolution of his will had he desired to hearken to its warning.

People v. Labuguen

Facts: Mr. Bonifacio, engaged in buying cows which the sold @ the public market. Mr.
Labuguen, the accused-appellant, told Mr. Bonifacio that he knows of 3 big cows for sale and
that the place is near. The deceased said he will go with the accused and see the cows after
breakfast. Later, Mr. Bonifacio was found lifeless near an irrigation.
Issues: WON there is craft and fraud employed?
Ruling: The court ruled affirmative. It is manifested when the accused said he would accompany
the victim to see the cows which the victim intended to buy, appellant was able to lure the victim
to go with him.

People v. Disipulo

Facts: Fidel Manio together with his wife and child rode a Toyota Tamaraw. Upon reaching
Malolos crossing, the group of Mr. Disipulo and his group hitchhiked. While along the Alido
Heights the group pointed a gun to Mr. Manio, bladed weapon against his wife and demanded
the payroll cash and got the money from his wife. They stabbed Mr. Manio and Mrs. Manio 3
times and afterwhich the group left them.
Issues: WON there is craft and fraud employed?
Ruling: The court did not agree with SolGen that fraud instead of craft was present. Craft was
clearly manifested when they tricked the victims pretending that they just needed a ride. Craft
was used by the accused for the victims not to suspect their plans.

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RUBEN LEE y AMOSO,

QUIRINO VIRAY, JR. y COLLADO, and JUAN LAROSA y GONZALES, defendants-
appellants. G.R. No. L-66848 December 20, 1991
Facts
June 22, 1981, at about 2:30 o'clock a.m., a passenger jeepney with Plate No. 632 CS, PUJ,
driven by Bernabe Poyuaon, was on its way from Rizal Avenue, Manila to Baclaran, Metro
Manila. In the jeepney as passengers while it was already nearing the Philippine General
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Hospital along Taft Avenue were some 13 persons. The jeepney was travelling southward along
Taft Avenue when Ruben Lee seated last on the left seated near the entrance of the jeepney
and who turned out to be the accused, drew out a gun and first poked it at Gina Salvador who
was to his left and then waived said gun at the other passengers, at the same time announcing
a hold-up. Simultaneously, the passenger seated in front of Ruben Lee who turned out to be
Quirino Viray, Jr. drew out a knife and poked it at Maria Lourdes Javier who was to his right; the
passenger seated just behind the driver who turned out to be Geronimo Gerdad drew out a gun
and pointed it at the driver; and the passenger seated further from the driver drew out and
poked a knife at the driver. The announcement of the hold-up frightened the passengers and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, rob, and carry away their wallets, watches and
other valuables. When approaching Pedro Gil Street, Ruben Lee ordered the driver to turn right
towards Roxas Boulevard and upon reaching Mabini Street, the jeepney was noticed by the
crew of Police Mobile Patrol Car No. 221 as Pedro Gil is a one-way street Patrol Car No. 221
tailed the jeepney and signalled it to a stop. Upon orders of Ruben Lee, the jeepney driver
stepped down to talk nicely to the policemen (who stopped their car about seven meters behind)
by telling the latter that they entered the street by accident. At the same time, Ruben Lee
warned the passengers to keep quiet, otherwise he will shoot them. Once the jeepney driver left
to talk to the policemen, Ruben Lee also stepped down, placed his gun on his seat and ordered
Quirino Viray, Jr. to take hold of it, and proceeded to the driver's seat, started the jeepney and
drove off towards Roxas Boulevard, turned left and sped towards Baclaran. Mobile Patrol Car
No. 221 followed suit with its sirens blowing. The jeepney, with Ruben Lee on the wheels,
turned left towards the airport and on reaching a dark roard, turned back. At this juncture,
Ruben Lee ordered one of the passengers thrown out in order Ito distract the attention of the
pursuers. So that the passenger beside him was thrown out. However, said passenger was not
hurt; instead he ran away after hitting ground. With the mobile patrol car in pursuit, the jeepney
sped back to Roxas Boulevard and towards the Luneta with the holduppers taking potshots at
the pursuers. And because the passengers heard shots coming from behind, they were either
down on the floor or were stooping from their seats, for fear that the policemen might shot
directly at them. The jeepney finally stopped at Marvex Drive in Balintawak, Quezon City. The
hold-uppers jumped out of the jeepney and engaged the pursuing policemen in a shoot out.
Ruben Lee pointed a gun at Gina Salvador's back and fired. When the firing subsided, one of
the hold-uppers, Geronimo Gerdad, was found seriously wounded. One of the passenger
victims, Leopoldo Espellego, was seriously wounded while three others were wounded, namely:
Gina Salvador who suffered a gunshot wound; Wong Ngaw, with lacerations and abrasions; and
Perpetuo Aquino, with a lacerated wound. One patrol car brought Gerdad and Espellego to the
Chinese Memorial Hospital where both were pronounced dead on arrival. Gina Salvador, Wong
Ngaw and Perpetuo Aquino were brought to the Jose Reyes Memorial Hospital where they were
treated.
Issue
Whether or not accused Juan Larosa is guilty of the crime charged beyond reasonable doubt
when he was not properly and credibly identified as participant in the crime.
Ruling
Yes. Even though the two alleged eyewitnesses, Gina Salvador and Rodrigo Conde, were not
able to identify Larosa. However, prosecution witness Conde positively identified Larosa as the
holdupper sitting on the front seat of the jeep. A crime is committed by a band whenever more
than three (3) armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense. In
the case at bar, commission by a band was properly appreciated as it has been shown that
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

when the holdup was staged, Ruben Lee, Quirino Viray, Geronimo Gerdad (deceased), and
accused Larosa were all armed with guns and knives. Craft is likewise present herein since the
accused and his cohorts pretended to be bona fide passengers of the jeep in order not to
arouse suspicion. However, once inside the jeep, they robbed the driver and the other
passengers. The judgement of the trial court affirmed.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, 

vs.
CRISOLOGO EMPACIS, accused-appellant.

G.R. No. 95756; May 14, 1993

Facts
A five men, namely: Crisologo Empacis, Romualdo Langomez, Zacarias Solis, Carlito
Antiga, and Bebe Antiga, assault and use personal violence upon Fidel Saromines by stabbing
him on different parts of his body and as a result of death on September 16, 1986 at 9pm. They
steal and carry away the sum of P12,000.00 belonging to the latter.
All the accused, except Romualdo Langomez, were thereafter taken into custody.
Langomez disappeared, and was never apprehended and brought to trial. Sometime in
December, 1987, during the trial, Carlito Antiga died from a gunshot wound.

Issue
Whether or not the RTCs’ decision of considering the attendance aggravating
circumstances of craft or fraud is correct?

Ruling
Yes, SC appreciated the aggravating circumstance of craft or fraud because Crisologo
Empacis and Romualdo Langomez, pretended to be bona fide customers of the victim's store
and on his pretext gained entry into the victim store and later, into another part of his dwelling.

RTCs’ decision affirmed with the modification that the indemnity for death payable to the heirs of
Saromines is increased.

SUPERIOR STRENGTH

TREACHERY
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, 
vs.
ABUNDIO ALBARIDO and BENEDICTO IGDOY, accused-appellants.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

G.R. No. 102367; October 25, 2001

Facts
On June 15, 1987 at about 7pm, there is a group of men walking on a trail. They are the
following; Celso Larbo, Danilo Palacio, and Lauro Palacio, together with Maximo Peña, Melchor
Palacio and Jose Palacio. There is another group of men composed of Aquilino Canaway, Elias
Merced, Abundio Albarido and Benedicto Igdoy who were waylaid and fired gun on the latter
group. Celso, Jose and Melchor were hit in the shooting and other men scampered for safety in
the tall grasses nearby. After the shooting, they approached and attacked Celso, Danilo, and
Lauro mercilessly hacked and stabbed with bolos many times. The appellants’ companion s
acted as guards to head off any attempt by anyone to aid the victim.

Issue
Whether or not the lower/trial court is correct in appreciating the nighttime as
aggravating circumstances?

Ruling
No, SC disagree with the trial court’s ruling that the crime was attended by the
aggravating circumstance of nighttime. There is no evidence to show that the appellants and
their companions purposely took advantage of the darkness of the night to insure the
commission of the crime. It is basic that for nighttime to be appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance there must be a showing that the accused purposely sought such time to facilitate
the commission of the crime or to prevent its discovery. Neither can we rule that there was
evident premeditation on the part of herein appellants because the prosecution failed to
establish the same.
SC find that treachery and abuse of superior strength are present here. But abuse of
superior strength is absorbed by treachery. These circumstances qualified the killing to murder.
The essence of treachery is that the attack comes without a warning and in a swift, deliberate
and unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to
resist or escape.
The appealed decision of the trial court was AFFIRMED; with MODIFICATION.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, 

vs.
SANTOS DUCAY and EDGARDO DUCAY, accused. SANTOS DUCAY, 
accused-appellant.

G.R. No. 86939; August 2, 1993

Facts
On or about October 12, 1986, Santos Ducay and Edgardo Ducay, father and son,
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, assault and shoot with a .45 caliber [pistol] and shotgun the
home of Laboses, thereby causing them serious physical injuries which directly caused the
death of Pacita Labos and Manuel Labos; thereby, also, with respect to Lina Labos-Mojica,
Edwin Labos and Maria Cristina Labos . But before the felonious incident, on 24 December
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

1985 Manuel Labos and Santos Ducay quarreled and stabbed each other; however, Santos
Ducay did not file any charges against Manuel who gave the former P200.00 for medical
expenses.

Issue
Whether or not the RTC is correct in convicting Santos Ducay with aggravating
circumstances of abuse of superior strength and treachery?

Ruling
Yes, two counts of murder with the qualifying circumstance of treachery since the attack
on the victims was so sudden and at a time when the victims were barely awake, thus giving
them no chance whatsoever to defend themselves.
SC affirmed the decision of RTC.

CIRCUMSTANCES BROUGH ABOUT WHICH ADD IGNOMINY TO THE NATURAL

EFFECTS OF THE ACT
People v. Magayac (G.R. No. 126043)

Facts:
On February 11, 1994, Jimmy Lumague, Tino Magayac and Manuel Magayac, were preparing
for fishing along with other persons. Tino Magayac pushed Jimmy for no reason. When
Jimmy asked why, Tino proceeded to hit Jimmy at the back. Hours later, Tino hit Jimmy at the
stomach and Manuel proceeded to hit Tino as well. The fight, however, was intervened. The
next day, Jimmy and Manuel exchanged blows. They were, again, separated from each other.

On February 12, At about 6:00 o'clock in the evening, Jimmy's mother, was at home with her
husband and Edwin when they saw the accused carrying a long rifle pass by the store of Pikong
Paez. Advised by her husband to follow the accused an warn Jimmy of possible reprisal, Eliza
looked for her son at Nestor Balana's house near the beach. She found him there sitting on a
bench talking with Nicanor Jack Balana at the balisbisan of Balanas house.  Eliza
warned Jimmy of the accused's impending arrival and urged him to go home. But he
replied, "Inay, mang na na po kayo at ako ay susunod" (Mother, please go ahead, I'll follow
you). As Eliza turned to go, she saw the accused approach Jimmy, the former saying to the
latter, "Huwag kang tumakbo, hinde kita aanuhin" (Don't run, I won't do anything to
you). Jimmy who as about to run, upon hearing the remark, stopped.

The accused then turned to Nicanor and said, "Jack, umalis ka na baka mapadamay ka
pa" (Go, Jack, you might get involved). Nicanor immediately retreated to his brother's house, a
distance of two (2) to five (5) meters away. Jimmy was trying to leave the place when he was
shot by the accused and hit on his right stomach. Jimmy fell down on his knees and collapsed
on the ground, face down. Manuel cocked his gun again and shot at Jimmy's back several
times. Manuel then went to the 262nd PC Mobile Force where he surrendered.

The court found him guilty of murder qualified by treachery or evident premeditation and
aggravated by cruelty and taking advantage of his public position as member of the CAFGU. His
voluntary surrender was appreciated as a mitigating circumstance. Nevertheless, he was
sentenced to death.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Issue:
WON the trial court is right in appreciating treachery and evident premeditation as qualifying
aggravating circumstances along with the generic aggravating circumstances of
cruelty/ignominy and taking advantage of public position in the commission of the crime.

Ruling:
Treachery is considered present when there is the employment of means of execution that give
the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate.
The prosecution showed that Jimmy was amply warned by his mother of Magayac's possible
murderous intention, which he at first ignored but later heeded when he saw the accused
walking towards him with a gun. Even when he was becalmed by the assuring words of the
accused that he would not hurt him, the deceased was again alerted on the real intentions of the
accused when the latter warned Jack Balana, "Jack, umalis ka na, baka mapadamay ka pa. 
Thus, far from being caught unaware by any act of the accused, Jimmy was given every
opportunity to avoid the danger he was in.
It is also for this reason that the eight (8) shots on the victim's back cannot  ipso facto be
considered as cruelty or ignominy. For cruelty to be appreciated against the accused, it
must be shown that the accused, for his pleasure and satisfaction, caused the victim to
suffer slowly and painfully as he inflicted on him unnecessary physical and moral pain.
The crime is aggravated because by deliberately increasing the suffering of the victim
the offender denotes sadism and consequently a marked degree of malice and
perversity. The mere fact of inflicting various successive wounds upon a person in order
to cause his death, no appreciable time intervening between the infliction of one (1)
wound and that of another to show that he had wanted to prolong the suffering of his
victim, is not sufficient for taking this aggravating circumstance into consideration.

But the lower court correctly concluded that there was evident premeditation, the circumstances
shown herein are more than enough to convince this Court that prior to the killing accused-
appellant had resolved to exact his pound of flesh and the rain of bullets from the M-14 rifle
which snuffed out the life of Jimmy was the result of a cold and dispassionate calculation on the
part of accused-appellant.

As to abuse of public position, the accused-appellant was a member of the dreaded CAFGU
and used his government issued M-14 rifle to kill Jimmy does not necessarily prove that he took
advantage of his public position to commit the crime.

The Decision of the trial court finding accused-appellant MANUEL MAGAYAC guilty of murder
is AFFIRMED, with the modification that he is sentenced to suffer the lesser penalty of reclusion
perpetua.
[ GR No. L-18793, Oct 11, 1968 ]
PEOPLE v. GETULIO PANTOJA +

Facts:
This murder case is before us for review of the sentence of death passed upon the accused by
the Court of First Instance of Quezon.
Late in the night of June 28, 1957, in the Barrio of Malinao, Atimonan, Quezon, a group of seven
young men serenaded the house, where Estelita Erotes lived.  Invited to come up, the young
men accepted the invitation.  When Wenceslao Hernandez was seated beside Estelita, an
uninvited Philippine Army Sergeant, Getulio Pantoja, in T-Shirt, came up and asked Hernandez
to allow him to sit beside Estelita, but Hernandez refused the request.  The time was about 1:30
A.M., June 29.  Pantoja said nothing and showed no sign of anger.  However, he
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

immediately left and went to his camp about half a kilometer distant, put on his fatigue
uniform, got a rifle, went back to the house and stationed himself on the stairway.  The time was
about 2:00 A.M.  At this time, the serenaders left the house to go to and serenade another
house in the Northern part of the Barrio.  Pantoja followed the group.  When the serenaders had
walked a distance of about thirty meters with Pantoja following them at a distance of about five
meters, Pantoja suddenly shouted "Ano yan? Ano yan?".  Turning their heads back they
saw Pantoja raise the garand rifle and aim at them.  Before any of them could run
away, Pantoja fired two shots in rapid succession. The first shot hit Angel Marasigan who
instantly fell on his back.  The second shot hit Wenceslao Hernandez who fell down.  The
other serenaders scampered away for safety.  Pantoja, who had walked nearer, then fired
one more shot at the prostrate body of Marasigan and four more shots at the prostrate body
of Hernandez.
The accused, testifying in his own defense, admitted that the shots he fired from the garand rifle
killed Marasigan and Hernandez.  The autopsy report attributed the deaths to internal
hemorrhage and the destruction of vital organs.
The lower court found the defendant guilty of double murder and sentenced him to the penalty
of death.
Appellant contends that the generic aggravating circumstance of abuse of public position
and ignominy were not present.

Issue:
WON the aggravating circumstance and ignominy should be appreciated against the accused-
appellant

Ruling:
The contention is meritorious.  There is nothing to show that the appellant took advantage of his
being a sergeant in the Philippine Army in order to commit the crimes.  The mere fact that he
was in fatigue uniform and had an army rifle at the time is not sufficient to establish that
he misused his public position in the commission of the crimes.  With regard to ignominy the
mere fact that the appellant fired one more shot at the prostrate body of Marasigan and four
more shots at the prostrate body of Hernandez is not sufficient to show the existence of said
aggravating circumstance.
The judgment of the trial court with all other premises considered in this case is hereby modified
by:  1. Sentencing the appellant for each murder to an indeterminate penalty of from 15 years to
20 years; 2. Ordering the appellant to pay the heirs of Angel Marasigan the sum of P12,000 as
compensatory damages, and to pay the heirs of Wenceslao Hernandez the sum of P12,000 as
compensatory damages.