G.R. No. 1605. March 17, 1905

Simeon Manayao and Angel Manayao, the appellants in this case, were charged with homicidio,
committed on the person of one Mateo Margarejo on the night of June 23,
1903, in the barrio of Laog, in the municipality of Angat, in the
Province of Bulacan.

It appears that one of the accused, Simeon Manayao, and the
deceased, Mateo Margarejo, were rivals in a love affair in their native
village, and that their mutual jealousies gave rise to an altercation
in a store or tienda in said village, in which a number of their friends and acquaintances took sides.

After some words the parties left the store and started for their
homes, but on the road the quarrel was renewed between the two accused
on one side, and the deceased and one of his friends on the other.
Finally the parties came to blows, and Simeon Manayao drew his
pocketknife and stabbed the said Mateo Margarejo in the side,
inflicting a wound from the effects of which said Margarejo died a few
hours later.

That the fatal blow was struck by Simeon Manayao is conclusively
proven by the evidence of one Martin Salvador, who was with the
deceased at the time of the occurrence, and who stated that he saw the
said Simeon Manayao stab the deceased with a penknife; this evidence is
corroborated by the statement made at the trial by Simeon Manayao
himself, who testified that he and his companion having been attacked
by a number of others, he “drew his knife, which he had in his pocket,
and with it cut his way through his opponents and escaped.”

The commission of the offense was marked by none of the aggravating
circumstances mentioned in the Penal Code and appears to have been the
result of a sudden burst of passion arising out of a wordy quarrel (arrebato and obcecacion)
which, under the provisions of paragraph 7 of article 9 of said code,
should be taken into consideration as an extenuating circumstance in
fixing the penalty for offenses of this nature.

Upon this statement of facts we are of opinion that the said Simeon Manayao was guilty of the crime of homicidio
with which he was charged, but we think that there is not sufficient
evidence in the record to support a finding of guilty as to Angel
Manayao. The proof shows that the deceased received but one wound, and,
while it is true that Angel Manayao took sides with said Simeon Manayao
in the quarrel, there is nothing in the evidence to show that he joined
in the commission of the homicidio, either as principal or
accomplice. There is nothing to show concerted action between the said
Angel Manayao and Simeon Manayao in the use of the knife and in the
stabbing which resulted in the death of the said Margarejo, nor that
the said Angel Manayao had any reason to believe that his companion
intended to make a deadly attack on the deceased.

The trial court was of opinion that the accused were jointly
responsible for the crime committed, but found them guilty not of
homicide but of inflicting a grave wound during the course of a
tumultuous quarrel, and imposed the penalty as provided by paragraph 1
of articles 416 and 420 of the Penal Code.

This sentence is not in accordance with the law and the evidence,
and should be reversed; the said Angel Manayao should be acquitted of
the crime with which he is charged, and the costs of both instances
declared de oficio as to him; and there should be imposed upon the said Simeon Manayao a sentence of twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal,
the accessory penalties prescribed by article 60 of the Penal Code, the
payment of one-half the costs of both instances, and an indemnification
of 500 pesos to the lawful heirs of the deceased. So ordered.

Arellano,C. J., Torres, Mapa, and Johnson, JJ., concur.