THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. FLORIANO T. BUYNAY, ET AL., ACCUSED, FLORIANO T. BUYNAY, DOMINGO L. CHAVES AND REYNALDO ARELLANO, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS.

Floriano T. Buynay, Domingo L. Chaves, Arturo C. Netuda, Reynaldo
Arellano, Leopoldo Porlas, Alfonso Rama, Mansueto Cabale, Crisanto
Velez, Florencio Tadlas, Jesus Medina and Rodrigo D. Sacala were charged
with the crimes of Direct Assault with Frustrated Murder in Criminal
Case No. CCC-XV-543 and with Direct Assault with Murder in Criminal Case
No. CCC-XV-591 before the then Circuit Criminal Court of Misamis
Oriental.

In Criminal Case No. CCC-XV-543, Reynaldo Arellano, Floriano T. Buynay
and Domingo Chaves pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced
accordingly, while Rodrigo Sacala, Leopoldo Porlas, Alfonso Rama and
Arturo Netuda pleaded not guilty. Jesus Medina, Mansueto Cabale and
Crisanto Velez have remained at large. After his arraignment, Alfonso
Rama escaped and was tried in absentia.

In Criminal Case No. CCC-XV-591, Floriano Buynay, Domingo Chaves and
Reynaldo Arellano pleaded guilty on arraignment, while Rodrigo Sacala,
Leopoldo Porlas, Arturo Netuda and Alfonso Rama pleaded not guilty.
Alfonso Rama was tried in absentia. Jesus Medina, Crisanto Velez and
Mansueto Cabale are still at large. Notwithstanding the plea of guilty
interposed by Buynay, Chaves and Arellano in this capital offense, the
lower court proceeded to receive evidence to determine the degree of
their culpability.

A joint trial of the two cases was held and, after hearing, the lower
court rendered judgment finding Floriano Buynay, Domingo Chaves and
Reynaldo Arellano guilty as principals of the crime of Direct Assault
with Murder in CCC-XV-591 and sentencing each of them to suffer the
penalty of death, to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of
Patrolman Romeo Tangara the sum of P12,000.00 and to pay 1/3 each of the
costs. Thus, this appeal concerns only Floriano Buynay, Domingo Chaves
and Reynaldo Arellano.

On reasonable doubt, Rodrigo Sacala, Alfonso Rama, Leopoldo Porlas and Arturo Netuda were acquitted of the crimes charged.

Prosecution evidence shows that early morning of October 21, 1973
prisoners Floriano Buynay, Domingo Chaves, Reynaldo Arellano and other
prisoners of the City Jail of Cagayan de Oro City conceived the plan to
escape. They were able to cut or chisel their leg irons with a file or
saw. About 5:30 in the afternoon of the same day, when the door of the
jail was opened to bring back to the cells the plywood bedding or
“tarimas” which were taken out to the yards for airing, appellants
Buynay, Chaves and Arellano and other prisoners rushed out of their
cells. Buynay, effectively, as planned, immediately approached and
stabbed the guard on duty, Patrolman Romeo Tangara, on the right chest
near the armpit with a stainless steel knife, while Chaves and Arellano
together with prisoners Tadlas and Velez, stabbed Patrolman Gregorio
Recla who was also on duty as corporal of the guard, at the back left
armpit and on the head.

Patrolman Tangara died of shock due to hemorrhage resulting from stab
wounds inflicted on him by Buynay. Pfc. Recla survived the injuries he
suffered because of medical attendance given him.

Chaves, Arellano and Buynay succeeded in escaping from the city jail
that afternoon. However, they were captured the following day in a
river near Burgos Street. Buynay and Chaves were investigated and both,
after they were apprised of their rights to remain silent and to have
counsel, gave their statements (Exhibits “B” and “A”) which were signed
and sworn to before Fiscal Noli ­Catli and Deputy Clerk of Court Aurelio
Zaldivar, respectively.

Appellant Reynaldo Arellano testified that he was a detained prisoner in
Cagayan de Oro City when in the afternoon of October 21, 1973 there was
disorder and confusion among the prisoners in the city jail. He left
his cell and immediately a shot rang out and he was hit on the stomach
and on the left leg. He stood up and seeing the other prisoners jumping
out the fence, he followed them and escaped. They did not plan to kill
the guards.

He admitted that he was an escapee from the Davao Penal Colony while
serving sentence of from 8 to 14 years imposed by the then Court of
First Instance of Pasay for the crime of robbery. He was captured and
detained in the city jail of Cagayan de Oro.

Appellant Floriano Buynay declared that when the beds were brought
inside the cells, the other prisoners rushed out. When Arellano and he
went out also, Patrolman Tangara fired at and hit Arellano who fell to
the ground. He approached Patrolman Tangara and tried to take the
policeman’s pistol but failed because he was bumped by the other
prisoners who were rushing out. He was captured about 6:00 in the
morning of the following day, October 22, 1973.

He claimed to have been maltreated, boxed and mauled by Patrolman
Macalla and otter policemen. He was not apprised of his constitutional
rights when his affidavit, Exhibit “B”, was taken but he signed it
before the fiscal because he was afraid. Their plan was to escape but
not to kill anyone.

Appellant Domingo Chaves did not take the witness stand.

Defense counsel, Atty. Luis R. Feria, in his brief admits that the
evidence adduced by the prosecution “both direct and circumstancial,
clearly establishes the existence of a conspiracy among the appellants.
The extrajudicial confessions of appellants Chaves (Exhibit “A”) and
Buynay (Exhibit “B”), as well as the testimonies of prosecution
witnesses Agustin Flores and Patrolman Recla depicting the conduct of
the appellants and their concerted and coordinated action in the
commission of the crime clearly show the presence of conspiracy in its
commission (People vs. Pedro, 16 SCRA 57; People vs. Verzo, 21 SCRA
1403; People vs. Cabiltes, 25 SCRA 112, and many others). And
undoubtedly, these extra­judicial confessions, Exhibits “A” and “B”, are
admissible against the other co-conspirators not only because
conspiracy here has been proven by independent evidence other than the
confession (People vs. Chaw Yaw Shun, 23 SCRA 127) but also because it
is clear from the facts and circumstances that persons other than the
declarant perpetrated the crime charged (People vs. Sta. Maria, 15 SCRA
222) (Appellants’ Brief, pp. 6-7)

However, appellants submit that the lower court erred in convicting them
of the complex crime of direct assault with murder because the killing
of the deceased Tangara is not murder, qualified by treachery, but only
simple homicide.

The contention is without merit. Prosecution evidence is clear that
after appellants rushed out of their cells, Buynay held the hand of
Patrolman Tangara who was then watching a game of “dama”, and inquired
if he was the guard on duty. Without waiting for an answer, Buynay
immediately stabbed Tangara. The suddenness of the assault on the
unsuspecting victim made it impossible for him to parry and avoid the
stab blows. The mode of attack adopted by the appellants insured the
accomplishment of their purpose without risk to themselves arising from
the defense which the person attacked might make. (People vs. Curiano, 9
SCRA 323)

Likewise, there is no merit in appellants’ claim that there was no
evident premeditation which attended the commission of the crime. The
plan to escape and attack the guards was hatched in the early morning of
October 21, 1973. The first thing they did was to chisel their leg
irons with a file. In the afternoon of the same day, as planned, they
waited for the plywood beds to be brought in and, immediately, they
rushed out and attacked their guards, an act manifestly indicating that
they did cling to their determination. Between the planning and the
execution there was sufficient lapse of time to reflect and meditate
upon the consequences of their act. In fact, they were so prepared that
they were armed with deadly weapons for the purpose of assaulting
whoever were the guards on duty. It is therefore hard to believe that
the plan was only to escape. What is credible is: they would escape
and attack whoever would be on the way.

As admitted by defense counsel in his brief, page 11, appellants Buynay
and Arellano are quasi-recidivists. Under Article 160 of the Revised
Penal Code, quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance and
the offender shall be punished with the maximum period of the penalty
prescribed by law for the new felony. It cannot be off-set by the
ordinary mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty.

Domingo Chaves escaped from the New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa on
October 8, 1981 and has remained at-large up to this date. Being a
death convict, his escape will not automatically result in the dismissal
of this appeal.

The trial court did not err in imposing upon appellants the death
penalty. However, for lack of necessary votes the penalty is reduced to
reclusion perpetua.

WHEREFORE, as modified in the sense that the penalty is reclusion
perpetua for each of the appellants, the appealed decision is AFFIRMED
in all other respects. With costs.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, Acting C.J., Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, De Castro, Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Escolin and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ., concur.

Fernando, C.J. and Teehankee, J., on leave (abroad).

Aquino, J., no part.

Abad Santos, J., he concurs but the indemnity should be increased to P30,000.