PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. CONSTANTINO DUEÑAS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

Review of a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, finding
appellants Constantino Dueñas, Felipe Gonzales, Juanito Tobias, Angel Flores,
Sofronio Dagami, Pablo Roxas and Custodio Mainar, alias “Inchik”, guilty of
murder and sentencing each and every one of them to death, to indemnify jointly
and severally the heirs of Carlos de los Reyes in the amount of P6,000.00, and
to pay their corresponding share in the costs.

The evidence shows that on February 16, 1958, fighting occurred among the
prisoners in the National Penitentiary in Muntinglupa, between a group of Manila
boys, who called themselves “Sigue-sigue” gang, and a group of Visayans and
Ilocanos, who in turn called themselves the “OXO” gang. The Manila boys occupied
a brigade known as 3-A on the second floor of the building, while the Visayans
and Ilocanos occupied Brigade 3-D. Brigades 3-A and 3-B are on the second floor,
facing each other, while Brigades 3-C and 3-D are on the first floor, underneath
Brigades 3-A and 3-B.

Early in the morning of February 17, a Tagalog inmate by the name of Dionisio
Valdez of Brigade 3-D was asked by his companions, who were Visayans and
Ilocanos, namely, Juanito Tobias, Constantino Dueñas and Custodio Mainar alias
“Inchik”, to go with them to Brigade 3-A to help in breaking up its door. As
said Brigade 3-A was occupied by Tagalogs like Valdez, they thought it would be
possible for Valdez to ask the inmates to open up the door. Valdez was afraid of
his colleagues, so he went up with them. They were able to leave their brigade,
because the lock to the door had been destroyed the night before. Upon reaching
the door of Brigade 3-A, they found that it was securely locked and the inmates
refused to open it. At about the same time, another inmate of Brigade 3-D by the
name of Nataniel Labampa also went up to the door of Brigade 3-A, accompanied by
Angel Flores, Custodio Mainar and Pablo Roxas. He also tried to have the door to
Brigade 3-A opened, but as already indicated above,the inmates of said brigade
had the door securely locked, so Labampa and his companions from Brigade 3-D
were not able to get inside. But while they were standing near the door, they
saw the appellant Constantino Dueñas coming out of Brigade 3-B with one Carlos
de los Reyes, who was the “ranchero” or food distributor of the brigade. As they
stepped out Dueñas had his arm on the back and shoulder of De los Reyes. They
went in the direction of the fire escape and as they approached it, Felipe
Gonzales approached Dueñas and De los Reyes, and hit the latter on the head with
a piece of wood measuring about one yard long and two inches by two inches in
thickness. De los Reyes immediately fell down and, thereupon, Juanito Tobias
approached him and stabbed him on the chest. Thereafter, Sofronio Dagami and
Pablo Roxas approached De los Reyes and let him down the fire escape, while
other prisoners down below hauled him to the ground.

It was also shown that because of the fighting that occurred on February 16,
the members of the “OXO” gang in Brigade 3-D gathered together on the night of
the following day, and agreed to take revenge against the members of the
“Sigue-sigue” gang. They broke the lock to their brigade and prepared some sharp
instruments for use in the projected assault against their enemies. The one who
especially incited his companions to take revenge was appellant Custodio Mainar.
The ones who helped in destroying the lock of the brigade were Juanito Tobias
and Felipe Gonzales. The purpose of all their preparations was to avenge the
death of their companions who had been attacked and killed the day before by
members of the “Sigue-sigue” gang. As a matter of fact, they had shouted as one
man, “We should revenge”, to indicate their determination to avenge the wrong
done, to their members.

The evidence also shows that the deceased Carlos de los Reyes was a Manila
boy and pertained to the “Sigue-sigue” gang, which gang is a rival of the “OXO”
gang to which the accused-appellants belong. The evidence likewise discloses
that the corpse of De los Reyes was examined by a physician who found that the
causes of death were: (1) strangulation; (2) stab wound, penetrating chest,
right side; and (3) lacerated wounds, forehead. It was also found out that there
was equimosis in the neck, caused by a piece of cloth which was tied around the
neck of the deceased.

All the accused denied having participated in the acts which brought about
the death of De los Reyes, imputing the act to their co-accused Jose de la Cruz,
who was acquitted by the court below. Jose de la Cruz had executed an affidavit,
dated February 22, 1958, to the effect that he was the one who had hit De los
Reyes the “ranchero”, on February 17, 1958 in Brigade 3-D. But Jose de la Cruz
denied having made such statement, when the same was shown to him at the trial.
He further declared that he was the guard of Brigade 3-B, and he was holding a
two-feet long piece of wood while guarding said brigade and that De los Reyes
stabbed him on the forearm, inflicting a wound thereon, but he did not report
the said stabbing. However, his statement is immaterial as he was acquitted by
the court below.

Felipe Gonzales, one of the appellants, denied having clubbed De los Reyes,
as testified to by the witnesses for the prosecution, claiming that he had
always been inside his brigade. Appellant Juanito Tobias also declared that he
was inside the brigade in the morning of February 17 and did not see anything
happen. He further asserted that the door of his brigade was closed and so he
could not have gone out. He also denied being a member of the “OXO” gang. He
admitted, however, that Nataniel Labampa and Dionisio Valdez are companions of
his in Brigade 3-D.

Custodio Mainar, for his part, declared that at the time De los Reyes was
stabbed he was sleeping in his brigade where he had just arrived and was not
feeling well then, the brigade have just been raided by the “Sigue-sigue” gang.
He also denied that he, Dueñas and Tobias have gone up and having seen Felipe
Gonzales, Jose Tobias, Angel Flores and Constantino Dueñas in the morning in
question.

Constantino Dueñas also denied the testimonies of prosecution witnesses
Valdez and Labampa that he was seen in the company of De los Reyes in the
morning of February 17, 1958, as he was going out of Brigade 3-B. He declared
that he does not know De los Reyes, and that the person who gave them food that
morning was one by the name of Jaime, and not De los Reyes. He also declared
that he did not have anything to do with the commotion of February 17, 1958;
that when he heard the commotion in the morning, after he took his breakfast, he
met Loreto Villanueva who directed him to clean the dormitory. Loreto Villanueva
testified in his favor, declaring that Dueñas was in Brigade 3-D in the morning
of February 17, 1958; that when he was about to go out of the brigade, he met
Constantino Dueñas and told him not to go out; that he noticed the incident near
a fire escape, but did not see or know who were involved in the further
incident. Testifying further for Dueñas, he declared that when the incident
happened, he was inside the dormitory at the end of Brigade 3-D performing his
duty as cleaner, and that when he left the brigade Dueñas was still performing
his duty as cleaner. On cross-examination, he declared that he was at the end of
Brigade 3-B when he heard the commotion on the early morning of February 17, and
this place is about 7 meters from the door. He also testified that he had heard
the commotion at the gate of Brigade 3-A, because attempts had been made to go
up that brigade and at that time he was about 40 meters away from the door of
Brigade 3-A.

From the position in which he was at the time of the incident, it is evident
that the testimony of this witness is not sufficient to destroy the positive
testimonies of the witnesses for the prosecution that Dueñas was seen going out
of Brigade 3-B in the company of De los Reyes. Besides, the record shows that he
saw Dueñas long before the incident in question and not during its
occurrence.

A consideration of the evidence satisfies us that there was a conspiracy
between the accused-appellants to take revenge against the members of the
“Sigue-sigue” gang who had attacked them the previous day; that they had
prepared some sharp instruments to assault their opponents and that they had in
fact broken up the lock of their brigade 3-D. It was also shown that it was the
accused-appellants who asked the witnesses Valdez and Labampa to go up with them
to the door of Brigade 3-A, so as to use the latter, who are Manila boys, as a
ruse to secure the opening of the door of Brigade 3-A.

We are also satisfied that the persons who actually assaulted and killed De
los Reyes were Constantino Dueñas, who led De los Reyes out of brigade 3-B,
Felipe Gonzales, who struck the deceased on the head, and Juanito Tobias, who
stabbed said victim in the chest. The participation of these three accused is
therefore clear and positive. As to the other accused, we entertain grave doubts
as to whether or not they can be made responsible for the death of De los Reyes.
All that they had agreed upon on the night of February 16, was to take revenge
on the members of the “Sigue-sigue” gang who were inside Brigade 3-A. There was
no agreement to kill every Manila boy that they met. As a matter of fact, Valdez
and Labampa were Manila boys and were their companions in the brigade. As to
Dagami and Roxas, they only helped lower victims body down the free escape, but
did not take part in the attack.

As to the attack on the deceased De los Reyes, there is absolutely no
evidence that the accused-appellants had previously agreed to assault him in
case they would not be able to enter brigade 3-A. When the attack on De los
Reyes was made, the accused Dueñas and he were in front of the door of Brigade
3-A. The act of Felipe Gonzales in approaching De los Reyes and giving him a
blow on the head and that of Juanito Tobias in approaching the fallen De los
Reyes and stabbing him do not appear to have been induced by their co-accused.
The conspiracy was for them to attack the inmates of Brigade 3-A, not to attack
De los Reyes or any Manila boys who might come in their way. Under the above
circumstances, the other accused-appellants can not be made responsible for the
death of De los Reyes directly effected by Constantino Dueñas, Juanito Tobias
and Felipe Gonzales.

The evidence shows that Dueñas was in Bilibid Prison on the day of the attack
on De los Reyes, by reason of decisions of the Court of First Instance of Davao
in Cases Nos. 566, 562, 733 and 797, for robbery in an inhabited house (2
charges), evasion of service of sentence, and attempted evasion of service of
sentence, his imprisonment commencing on November 19, 1948 and ending on April
20, 1965 (Exh. “B”). Accused-appellant Felipe Gonzales has the following aliases
in his records, namely, Fernando Gonzales y Baral, Felipe de los Santos, Pedro
de los Santos and Juanito Sanchez. His record, Exhibit B-1, shows that he was
committed to prison by decisions of the Courts of First Instance of Davao and
Lanao in Cases Nos. 750, 2023 and 2108, for robbery, robbery with intimidation
of persons, and evasion of service, having begun service of sentence on August
30, 1950 to end on August 11, 1965. Accused-appellant Juanito Tobias, alias
Juanito Tobias y Ramos, appears to be in prison by reason of a judgment of the
Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, that of the Court of First Instance of
Manila, and those of the Justice of the Peace Court of Vigan and Pasay City, for
theft, evasion of service of sentence, violation of Article 157 and robbery in
an uninhabited place, in cases Nos. 1251, 48-R, 2002 and 32851, and served
sentence beginning April 14, 1954,to end January 15, 1962.

The crime committed by the accused in this case is that of murder, qualified
by the circumstance of treachery, for the reason that the victim was attacked
suddenly by the appellants, with the use of deadly weapons, without provocation
and without opportunity on the victim’s part to defend himself. No mitigating
circumstance attended the commission of the offense, and in view of the fact
that the appellants were serving sentences at the time of the commission of the
crime, the penalty which should be imposed upon them is the maximum period of
the penalty prescribed by law for murder, which is death, in accordance with
Article 160 of the Revised Penal Code. The imposition of the penalty of death by
the lower court is, therefore, correct.

Wherefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence of death imposed by the
trial court upon the accused-appellants Constantino Dueñas, Felipe Gonzales and
Juanito Tobias are hereby affirmed. The judgment and sentence imposed upon the
other appellants Angel Flores, Sofronio Dagami, Pablo Roxas and Custodio Mainar,
alias “Inchik” are hereby set aside, and they are hereby declared acquitted of
the criminal charge. With proportionate costs against the three
accused-appellants found guilty of the murder charge and a proportionate share
of the costs de oficio as to the shares of the other
appellants.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion,
Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Dizon, and De Leon, JJ., concur.