Title
People vs. Aquino
Case
G.R. No. L-49808
Decision Date
Feb 26, 1988
In 1972, Inocencia Tiaga was forcibly taken from her home, assaulted, and killed by a group of men. The Supreme Court affirmed murder charges, citing treachery and conspiracy, but reduced the penalty to life imprisonment due to the abolition of the death penalty.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-49808)

Charges and Initial Ruling

The complaint detailed that the accused, armed and acting in concert, attacked and ultimately killed Mrs. Tiaga after forcibly engaging in sexual assault against her will. The Circuit Criminal Court in Bacolod City, after trial, found them guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt but acquitted them of rape due to reasonable doubt regarding that charge. As a result, the court imposed the death penalty owing to the aggravating circumstances present.

Appeal and Review Process

Due to the imposition of the death penalty, the case was automatically elevated to the Supreme Court for review. Various briefs were submitted by the accused and the Solicitor General, with natural complications arising from changes in law, particularly the abolition of the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution.

Withdrawal and Status of Appeals

Appellant Julio Gumban filed a motion to withdraw his appeal, which was granted. His case was remanded to the lower court for judgment execution, automatically commuting his death sentence to reclusion perpetua. The court then required the remaining appellants to declare their intentions regarding their appeals. Only Montano and Posadas expressed their desires to pursue their cases, while Aquino's failure to respond resulted in the dismissal of his appeal.

Prosecution's Evidence and Defense Claims

The prosecution's case was built upon testimonies from six witnesses, including family members and law enforcement. Conversely, the appellants mounted a defense of alibi, claiming they were engaged in other activities some distance away during the time of the murder. The trial court, however, favored the prosecution's evidence, emphasizing the credibility of witnesses and the lack of convincing evidence for the alibi.

Assessment of Evidential Claims

In their appeal, the appellants contended that the trial court improperly attributed evident premeditation to their actions. They argued that the court relied on circumstantial evidence and inferences rather than direct, corroborated proof of planning or conspiracy. The Supreme Court acknowledged that qualifying circumstances such as evident premeditation must be established by direct evidence and cannot rest solely on assumptions or presumptions.

Treachery as a Qualifying Circumstance

The Supreme Court found that while evident premeditation was not proven, treachery was adequately established through the spontaneous and violent execution of the crime, where the victim was caught off-guard and totally defenseless. The accused had disguised their intent under the pretense of relational familiarity and ambushed the victim. This conclusion supported the court’s classification of the offense as murder rather than homicide.

Conspiracy and Aggravating Circumstances

The evidence supporting the existence of a conspiracy among the accused was deemed sufficient, with acts demonstrating shared intent to assault the victim. The trial court's findings of aggravating circumstances, including disregard f

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.