THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. REYNALDO SANTOS Y JUBILADO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

People versus Santos

The Case

This is People versus Santos, a criminal case on automatic review of a conviction for murder. Reynaldo Santos was charged with killing Bayani Cuyugan with a fan knife, the balisong, in Manila in November 1969. The trial court convicted him of murder qualified by treachery, with evident premeditation, and sentenced him to death. The case matters because the Supreme Court, on automatic review, refused to affirm the graver crime. It held that treachery and evident premeditation were not proved beyond reasonable doubt, and it reduced the conviction to homicide. It is a compact lesson on the burden of proving qualifying circumstances, on the rule favoring the interpretation kinder to the accused, and on the strict requirements of the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and sufficient provocation.

Procedural History

The City Fiscal of Manila filed an Information for murder against Reynaldo Santos. He pleaded not guilty. The case was tried before Judge Manuel Pamaran of the Circuit Criminal Court of Manila, and the hearing was finished in a single day. The trial court rendered its decision in January 1970, finding him guilty of murder qualified by treachery with the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation, and imposing the death penalty, together with an order to indemnify the heirs of the deceased and to pay damages and costs. A motion for reconsideration and new trial was filed and was denied. Because the penalty imposed was death, the case came to the Supreme Court on automatic review.

Facts

At about five o'clock in the afternoon of November 6, 1969, Bayani Cuyugan was sleeping on a bench under a bougainvillea vine. Reynaldo Santos and some companions placed four candles at the corners of the bench and tied a handkerchief around Bayani's face, making it appear that he was lying in state. Bayani's mother, Remigia Mangalili, came upon the group and shouted at them. Santos's companions ran away, leaving him behind. When Bayani woke and confronted Reynaldo about the joke, Reynaldo drew a fan knife and made a motion to stab him but missed. The mother intervened and took her son home.

At about six o'clock that evening, mother and son went down from the house to go to church. As they walked in their yard, Reynaldo suddenly appeared and, without warning, stabbed Bayani on his left side, then ran away. Bayani was brought to the Jose Reyes Memorial Hospital. He died on November 16, 1969. The post-mortem examination showed a penetrating stab wound on the left lateral lumbar region, lacerating the descending colon and the left kidney.

The accused, then twenty-one years old and a jeepney driver, claimed self-defense. He said that after the joke, Bayani held him by the collar and boxed him, and later drew a gun and was about to shoot him but could not because children were playing around, so he stabbed Bayani at a distance of about one meter. His father testified that he talked with the victim's mother, who agreed to compromise for 200 pesos, and that he later surrendered his son to the police. The trial court found the defense incredible and convicted him as charged.

Issues

• Whether or not the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of murder instead of homicide, that is, whether or not treachery was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
• Whether or not the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation attended the killing.
• Whether or not the accused is entitled to the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and sufficient provocation on the part of the victim.
• Whether or not a new trial should be granted by reason of irregularities during the trial prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused.

Applicable Provisions

Article 13, paragraph 7 of the Revised Penal Code, on voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance, provides:

That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution.

The Court uses this provision to test whether the accused himself submitted to the authorities, and it holds that an arrest brought about by another person is not voluntary surrender.

Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, on homicide, provides:

Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal.

This is the provision under which the Court ultimately convicts the accused, since the qualifying circumstances of murder were not established.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court agreed with the defense that the accused is liable only for homicide. Treachery, like any element of the crime, must be proved by clear and convincing evidence sufficient to establish its existence beyond reasonable doubt. It is not to be presumed from a mere statement that the attack was sudden. The Court noted that both prosecution witnesses could not say from where Reynaldo came or whether Bayani was stabbed from behind or face to face, and that the medical evidence showed the assailant was probably facing the victim, holding the weapon in his right hand. The Court then applied the rule that where the inculpatory facts admit of two or more explanations, one consistent with a lesser degree of liability and the other with a graver one, the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty, and the Court adopts the explanation more favorable to the accused.

On the second issue, the Court held that evident premeditation was not present. The stabbing was the aftermath of the joke played that very same afternoon, and there was no showing that the accused then and there nurtured a plan to kill, or that sufficient time elapsed for him to reflect on the consequences of his act.

On the third issue, the Court rejected both mitigating circumstances. The accused did not surrender himself; his father brought a policeman to the house and had him taken into custody while he was sleeping, which rules out any intention of unilateral submission. As for provocation, even if the victim boxed the accused, it was the accused who provoked the victim by playing the dirty joke, so the provocation came from him and cannot be raised in his favor.

Doctrine

Treachery must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, and mere suddenness of the attack is not enough; the mode adopted must be shown to have been knowingly intended to insure the accomplishment of the criminal purpose without risk to the assailant from any defense the victim might offer. Where the facts are capable of two explanations, one consistent with a lesser liability and the other with a graver one, the Court adopts the one more favorable to the accused. Evident premeditation cannot be appreciated where the fatal assault followed closely a previous incident between the assailant and the victim. Voluntary surrender under Article 13, paragraph 7 of the Revised Penal Code requires that the accused himself submit to a person in authority; an arrest brought about by the initiative of another is not voluntary surrender. Sufficient provocation must come from the victim, not from the accused who provoked the victim into reacting.

Disposition

The decision under review was modified: Reynaldo Santos was found guilty of homicide, with no mitigating and no aggravating circumstance, sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of eight years and one day of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen years and four months of reclusion temporal as maximum, and ordered to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the sum of 12,000 pesos, with costs against him.

Remember This

Memorize this line: treachery is never presumed from the mere suddenness of an attack, and where the facts admit of two explanations, the Court takes the one kinder to the accused. Examiners use this case to test the proof required for qualifying circumstances and the strict elements of voluntary surrender and sufficient provocation.