People
vs Amadeo Peralta, et al.
G.R. No. L-19069
October 29, 1968
Digested Cases
Facts:
On February 16, 1958, in the municipality of Muntinglupa, province of Rizal, two known warring gangs inside the New Bilibid Prison as “Sigue-Sigue” and “OXO” were preparing to attend a mass at 7 a.m. However, a fight between the two rival gangs caused a big commotion in the plaza where the prisoners were currently assembled. The fight was quelled and those involved where led away to the investigation while the rest of the prisoners were ordered to return to their respective quarters.
In the investigation, it was found out that the accused, “OXO” members, Amadeo Peralta, Andres Factora, Leonardo Dosal, Angel Paramog, Gervasio Larita and Florencio Luna (six among the twenty-two defendants charged therein with multiple murder), are also convicts confined in the said prisons by virtue of final judgments.
They conspired, confederated and mutually helped and aided each other, with evident premeditation and treachery, all armed with deadly weapons, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously killed “Sigue-Sigue” sympathizers Jose Carriego, Eugenio Barbosa and Santos Cruz, also convicts confined in the same institution, by hitting, stabbing, and striking them with ice picks, clubs and other improvised weapons, pointed and/or sharpened, thereby inflicting upon the victims multiple serious injuries which directly caused their deaths.
Issues
(a) Whether or not there was conspiracy in the commission of the multiple murder?
(b) Whether or not an aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism is present in the commission of the crime?
Held:
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Generally, conspiracy is not a crime unless when the law specifically provides a penalty thereof as in treason, rebellion and sedition. However, when in resolute execution of a common scheme, a felony is committed by two or more malefactors, the existence of a conspiracy assumes a pivotal importance in the determination of the liability of the perpetrators. Once an express or implied conspiracy is proved, all of the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and character of their respective active participation in the commission of the crime/s perpetrated in furtherance of the conspiracy because in contemplation of law the act of one is the act of all.
The collective criminal liability emanates from the ensnaring nature of conspiracy. The concerted action of the conspirators in consummating their common purpose is a patent display of their evil partnership, and for the consequences of such criminal enterprise they must be held solidarity liable. However, in order to hold an accused guilty as co-principal by reason of conspiracy, it must be established that he performed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, either by actively participating in the actual commission of the crime, or by lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy.
Conspiracy alone, without execution of its purpose, is not a crime punishable by law, except in special instances (Article 8, Revised Penal Code) which, do not include robbery.
Reverting now to the case at bar, the trial court correctly ruled that conspiracy attended the commission of the murders. To wit, although there is no direct evidence of conspiracy, the court can safely say that there are several circumstances to show that the crime committed by the accused was planned. First, all the deceased were Tagalogs and members of sympathizers of “Sigue-Sigue” gang (OXO members were from either Visayas or Mindanao), singled out and killed thereby, showing that their killing has been planned. Second, the accused were all armed with improvised weapons showing that they really prepared for the occasion. Third, the accused accomplished the killing with team work precision going from one brigade to another and attacking the same men whom they have previously marked for liquidation and lastly, almost the same people took part in the killing of the Carriego, Barbosa and Cruz.
In view of the attendance of the special aggravating circumstances of quasi-recidivism, as all of the six accused at the time of the commission of the offenses were serving sentences in the New Bilibid Prison by virtue of convictions by final judgments that penalty for each offense must be imposed in its maximum period, which is the mandate of the first paragraph of article 160 of the RPC. Hence, severe penalty imposed on a quasi-recidivist is justified because of the perversity and incorrigibility of the crime.
Accordingly, the judgment a quo is hereby modified as follows: Amadeo Peralta, Andres Factora, Leonardo Dosal, Angel Paramog, Gervasio Larita and Florencio Luna are each pronounced guilty of three separate and distinct crimes of murder, and are each sentenced to three death penalties; all of them shall, jointly and severally, indemnify the heirs of each of the three deceased victims in the sum of P12,000; each will pay one-sixth of the costs.
G.R. No. L-19069
October 29, 1968
Digested Cases
Facts:
On February 16, 1958, in the municipality of Muntinglupa, province of Rizal, two known warring gangs inside the New Bilibid Prison as “Sigue-Sigue” and “OXO” were preparing to attend a mass at 7 a.m. However, a fight between the two rival gangs caused a big commotion in the plaza where the prisoners were currently assembled. The fight was quelled and those involved where led away to the investigation while the rest of the prisoners were ordered to return to their respective quarters.
In the investigation, it was found out that the accused, “OXO” members, Amadeo Peralta, Andres Factora, Leonardo Dosal, Angel Paramog, Gervasio Larita and Florencio Luna (six among the twenty-two defendants charged therein with multiple murder), are also convicts confined in the said prisons by virtue of final judgments.
They conspired, confederated and mutually helped and aided each other, with evident premeditation and treachery, all armed with deadly weapons, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously killed “Sigue-Sigue” sympathizers Jose Carriego, Eugenio Barbosa and Santos Cruz, also convicts confined in the same institution, by hitting, stabbing, and striking them with ice picks, clubs and other improvised weapons, pointed and/or sharpened, thereby inflicting upon the victims multiple serious injuries which directly caused their deaths.
Issues
(a) Whether or not there was conspiracy in the commission of the multiple murder?
(b) Whether or not an aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism is present in the commission of the crime?
Held:
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Generally, conspiracy is not a crime unless when the law specifically provides a penalty thereof as in treason, rebellion and sedition. However, when in resolute execution of a common scheme, a felony is committed by two or more malefactors, the existence of a conspiracy assumes a pivotal importance in the determination of the liability of the perpetrators. Once an express or implied conspiracy is proved, all of the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and character of their respective active participation in the commission of the crime/s perpetrated in furtherance of the conspiracy because in contemplation of law the act of one is the act of all.
The collective criminal liability emanates from the ensnaring nature of conspiracy. The concerted action of the conspirators in consummating their common purpose is a patent display of their evil partnership, and for the consequences of such criminal enterprise they must be held solidarity liable. However, in order to hold an accused guilty as co-principal by reason of conspiracy, it must be established that he performed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, either by actively participating in the actual commission of the crime, or by lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy.
Conspiracy alone, without execution of its purpose, is not a crime punishable by law, except in special instances (Article 8, Revised Penal Code) which, do not include robbery.
Reverting now to the case at bar, the trial court correctly ruled that conspiracy attended the commission of the murders. To wit, although there is no direct evidence of conspiracy, the court can safely say that there are several circumstances to show that the crime committed by the accused was planned. First, all the deceased were Tagalogs and members of sympathizers of “Sigue-Sigue” gang (OXO members were from either Visayas or Mindanao), singled out and killed thereby, showing that their killing has been planned. Second, the accused were all armed with improvised weapons showing that they really prepared for the occasion. Third, the accused accomplished the killing with team work precision going from one brigade to another and attacking the same men whom they have previously marked for liquidation and lastly, almost the same people took part in the killing of the Carriego, Barbosa and Cruz.
In view of the attendance of the special aggravating circumstances of quasi-recidivism, as all of the six accused at the time of the commission of the offenses were serving sentences in the New Bilibid Prison by virtue of convictions by final judgments that penalty for each offense must be imposed in its maximum period, which is the mandate of the first paragraph of article 160 of the RPC. Hence, severe penalty imposed on a quasi-recidivist is justified because of the perversity and incorrigibility of the crime.
Accordingly, the judgment a quo is hereby modified as follows: Amadeo Peralta, Andres Factora, Leonardo Dosal, Angel Paramog, Gervasio Larita and Florencio Luna are each pronounced guilty of three separate and distinct crimes of murder, and are each sentenced to three death penalties; all of them shall, jointly and severally, indemnify the heirs of each of the three deceased victims in the sum of P12,000; each will pay one-sixth of the costs.
