Case Summary (G.R. No. 231871)
Petitioner and Respondent
Petitioner: People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee). Respondent/Appellant: Hermogenes Magdueno (accused-appellant).
Key Dates
Date of the killing: October 15, 1980. Relevant arrests, identifications and investigative acts occurred in late October 1980. Decision under review rendered by the Supreme Court on September 22, 1986.
Applicable Law and Authorities
Constitutional framework applicable at the time of decision: the constitution in force in 1986. Issues in the record involved admissibility of extra-judicial confession under the Bill of Rights as quoted by the trial court, and criminal law principles governing murder and its attendant aggravating and qualifying circumstances. The lower court and the Supreme Court relied on precedents cited in the record addressing treachery, evident premeditation, voluntariness of confessions, corroboration, and aggravating circumstances (cases referenced in the record include People v. Macarloia; People v. Rhoda; People v. Malmsay; People v. Radomes; Morales, et al. v. Ponce Enrile, et al.; Moncupa, Jr. v. Ponce Enrile, et al.; People v. Dorado; People v. Opiniano; People v. Pontanosa; U.S. v. Rodriguez; People v. Rizal).
Procedural Posture
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Palawan, Puerto Princesa City convicted Magdueno of murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation and aggravated by price or reward and by commission in contempt of/with insult to public authority. The RTC sentenced him to death and ordered civil indemnity (P30,000 actual; P20,000 moral). Other accused were acquitted for insufficiency of evidence. Magdueno appealed via the automatic review process to the Supreme Court. He assigned two principal errors: (I) erroneous conviction for murder, and (II) erroneous admission of his extra-judicial confession.
Facts Found by the Trial Court
On the morning of October 15, 1980, shortly after 8:00 a.m., while Fiscal Dilig was seated in his jeep near his residence, an assailant approached and shot him twice, inflicting wounds to the neck and lumbar region that were fatal. The autopsy described two gunshot wounds that penetrated vital structures and were certifiably fatal. Three eyewitnesses who were not previously acquainted with the assailant identified Magdueno at confrontations: Elena Lim observed a man with a gun and a clutch bag shortly after hearing shots; Ernesto Mari Gonzales, a security guard, saw the shooter and noted a distinctive scar on the shooter’s left temple; Cynthia Canto saw the shooter fire and later identified Magdueno. Magdueno gave an extra-judicial statement (confession) admitting he was hired to kill Dilig for a price, identifying a proposed remunerative scheme and implicating others; two of the persons he implicated were later dropped from the information. Magdueno offered an alibi placing him at Leonardo Senas’s house in Aborlan, but the court found his alibi unpersuasive and noted corroborative testimony and circumstantial evidence indicating Magdueno’s presence in Palawan near the time of the killing. The record also contained testimony about Magdueno’s prior incarceration and reputation as a killer while in prison.
Issues Framed for Decision
- Whether the evidence, including eyewitness identifications and corroborative proof, supported the conviction for murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation and aggravated by price or reward.
- Whether Magdueno’s extra-judicial confession was admissible and properly received into evidence.
- Whether the aggravating circumstance “commission of the crime in contempt of or with insult to public authority” was established.
Court’s Findings on Identity and Sufficiency of Evidence
The Supreme Court concurred with the RTC that Magdueno was positively and categorically identified by three eyewitnesses who viewed the assailant in broad daylight. The Court emphasized: the witnesses were strangers to him prior to the event; each made a positive identification at confrontation; and one witness specifically described a scar that matched physical characteristics of Magdueno, reinforcing identification. The Court found the defense alibi unsupported and not shown to render it impossible for Magdueno to have been at the scene; the trial court’s finding that a bus ride from Aborlan to Puerto Princesa required only a little more than two hours undercut the alibi’s exculpatory force. The Court regarded the totality of direct eyewitness identifications and corroborative evidence as establishing the appellant’s identity beyond reasonable doubt.
Court’s Findings on Treachery and Evident Premeditation
The Court affirmed the trial court’s conclusion that treachery existed because the assailant fired two successive shots at a defenseless victim seated in his vehicle, with no time afforded for defense. The manner and circumstances—deliberate approach, sudden shooting, and immediate flight while still bearing the firearm—demonstrated that the assailant adopted means to ensure the killing without exposing himself to risk from any defensive act by the victim. The Court also found evident premeditation present, given planning indicators in the record: the accused’s travel to Palawan, the alleged agreement to perform the killing for hire, and the execution of the killing in a manner consistent with pre-arranged intent. These attendant circumstances qualified the killing as murder.
Court’s Findings on the Extra-Judicial Confession
The Court held that the extra-judicial confession was admissible. The trial court had detailed the custodial setting, observed that Magdueno had been informed of his rights, and noted the presence and assistance of counsel (Atty. Demaala) during custodial interrogation. The record contained counsel’s certification of attendance and counsel’s assistance during interrogation, and an NBI officer corroborated counsel’s presence. The Court accepted the trial court’s assessment that the confession was voluntary and spontaneous, noting that the confession contained specific factual details (planning, reward, weapon description) that investigators could not readily have supplied and that these details were corroborated by other evidence. The Court applied the presumption of voluntariness in the absence of credible contrary evidence and relied on prior authorities treating similar confessions as admissible when counsel was present and warnings were given.
Court’s Analysis of Aggravating Circumstances and Penalty
The Court agreed that “price or reward” operated as an aggravating circumstance, because Magdueno admitted and the records supported that he was hired for remuneration. However, the Court found error in treating “commission of the crime in contempt of or with insult to public authority” as an aggravating circumstance in this case. The record showed the victim was himself a public authority (the City Fiscal); the authority cited by the Court required that, for that aggravation to ap
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 231871)
Court, Citation, and Procedural Posture
- Reported at 228 Phil. 212; En Banc, G.R. No. 68699; Decision dated September 22, 1986.
- Decision per curiam of the Supreme Court, sitting en banc, on automatic review of a Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Palawan and Puerto Princesa City conviction.
- The RTC found Hermogenes Magdueno guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation, and aggravated by price or reward and by commission "in contempt of/or with insult to public authority."
- The RTC sentence: death (the supreme penalty) with all accessory penalties, costs, and indemnity to heirs of victim Fernando M. Dilig in the sum of P30,000.00 as actual damages and P20,000.00 as moral damages.
- The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence, the trial court’s findings, and the appellant’s assignments of error and affirmed the RTC judgment except for one error regarding an aggravating circumstance.
Parties
- Plaintiff-Appellee: People of the Philippines.
- Accused-Appellant: Hermogenes Magdueno.
- Co-accused originally charged in the amended information: Apolinario Sison, Teodorico Ramirez, Alejandro Guevarra, Alfredo Guevarra, and Edgardo Casabay.
- Victim: Fernando M. Dilig, City Fiscal of Puerto Princesa City.
- Civil claimant/witness for damages: Gloria S. Dilig, widow of the victim.
Charge / Amended Information
- Amended information charged Magdueno and five others with possession of an unlicensed firearm (one 9mm automatic pistol) and, while in possession thereof, conspiring and confederating together to wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and shoot Fernando M. Dilig with treachery and evident premeditation, inflicting mortal wounds which caused his death.
- The information alleged damages to the heirs in the amount of P250,000.00 and invoked the aggravating circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, commission of the crime for a price, reward or promise, and commission "in contempt of or with insult to public authorities."
Facts Established by the Prosecution and Accepted by the RTC
- Date and time: October 15, 1980, a few minutes past 8:00 o’clock in the morning.
- Location: near the house of Fiscal Dilig at the corner of Roxas and D. Mendoza Streets, Puerto Princesa City; Dilig seated in the driver’s seat of his jeep parked near his house.
- Incident: Two successive gunshots were fired by an assailant approaching from the victim’s left, which inflicted two fatal wounds that instantaneously caused Dilig’s death.
- Immediately after shooting, the assailant fled still holding the firearm.
Autopsy Findings (Dr. Rufino P. Yuzon)
- Wound 1 (neck):
- Entrance wound: 0.7 cm diameter with contusion collar 0.3 cm wide, located at the lateral aspect of the left lower neck; directed medially, slightly anteriorly and upwards.
- Track: penetrated subcutaneous tissues and muscles; involved left lateral portion of the esophagus, right lateral portion of the hyoid bone, right common carotid artery, right jugular vein, pierced the sternocleidomastoid muscle.
- Exit wound: 1.3 cm located at the lateral aspect of the right neck about 1½ inches below the angle of the mandible.
- Wound 2 (lumbar/abdominal region):
- Entrance wound: 0.7 cm diameter with contusion collar 0.3 cm, located at the left lumbar region about 2 inches posterior to the mid-axillary line; directed medially, slightly anteriorly and slightly upwards.
- Track: penetrated subcutaneous tissues and muscles, entered abdominal cavity; involved upper portion of the descending colon and two loops of small intestines; pierced right abdominal muscles.
- Exit wound: 1.5 cm located at the right lumbar region about 1½ inches anterior to the mid-axillary line.
- Medical conclusion: Both wounds were fatal and “death will definitely occur.”
Eyewitness Testimony and Identifications
- Three witnesses positively identified the assailant as Hermogenes Magdueno; each testimony included circumstances that corroborated identification:
- Elena Adion Lim:
- Position: seated at her gate about 20–30 meters from Dilig’s house.
- Observations: saw the gunman coming from where she heard two shots; the gunman passed by her house carrying a short gun in his right hand and a clutch bag, hurriedly proceeding toward Liwanag Street.
- Identification: on October 30, 1980 she identified Magdueno as the man she saw on October 15, 1980.
- Ernesto Mari Y. Gonzales:
- Position: security guard on a tricycle passing in front of Dilig’s house.
- Observations: heard two gunshots, asked driver to stop; described the gunman wearing a white polo shirt, blue pants and a hat, holding the gun pointed at Dilig; when the gunman turned left, Gonzales observed a scar on the left temple below the left eyebrow; the man walked in a limping manner toward Mendoza Street.
- Identification: positively identified Magdueno in the witness chamber.
- Cynthia Canto:
- Position: taxi dancer in front of a nearby store (Aling Charing), waiting for a tricycle.
- Observations: saw the gunman standing for some time, then approach Dilig seated in his jeep and fire two successive shots, then exit toward Mendoza Street.
- Identification: could not be mistaken; upon police invitation in Plaridel, Aborlan, Palawan, she readily identified Magdueno as the killer.
- Elena Adion Lim:
- The Court noted that Magdueno was a stranger in town to these witnesses before the incident and that identifications occurred in broad daylight with clear view.
Extra-Judicial Confession and Corroborative Details
- Magdueno executed an extra-judicial confession in which:
- He admitted killing Fiscal Dilig for a price or reward.
- He implicated Leonardo Senas and Mauricio de Leon in the commission of the crime.
- He described being hired by a “mysterious mastermind” whose representative agreed to pay P80,000.00 for the killing, of which the representative would receive a clean bill of P30,000.00 for Magdueno; he received an advance payment of P5,000.00 with P25,000.00 to be paid after the mission.
- He described the firearm used as a 9mm automatic revolver (the NBI had identified the weapon as a 9mm automatic pistol).
- Consequences of confession:
- Leonardo Senas and Mau