Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1964 > March 1964 Decisions > G.R. No. L-17234 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOLAS G. MOJICA:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-17234. March 31, 1964.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NICOLAS MOJICA Y GIRA, Accused-Appellant.

Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Salvador J. Lorayes for Accused-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. EVIDENCE; EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION; CORROBORATED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. — An extrajudicial confession of an accused is properly admissible against him where it is substantially corroborated by other evidence and the voluntariness of its execution is beyond serious dispute.

2. ID.; ID.; CONSPIRACY PROVEN BY EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION OF CO-ACCUSED. — The element of conspiracy is held to have attended the commission of the crime of murder where both the extrajudicial confessions of appellant and of his co-accused, as well as the latter’s judicial confession, contain statements to the effect that they had agreed to kill the deceased to avenge the death of a leader of his gang.

3. CRIMINAL LAW; MURDER; PREMEDITATION PRESENT WHERE THERE WAS A LAPSE OF ALMOST TWO HOURS FROM INCEPTION TO EXECUTION. — There is evident premeditation attending a killing where sufficient time, from 4:15 to 6:00 p.m. of the same day, was shown to have intervened from the inception of the plan up to its execution.

4. ID.; ID.; TREACHERY; SUDDEN ATTACK BY TWO MEN. — There is treachery when two men suddenly stab another forty times in vital parts of the body.


D E C I S I O N


PER CURIAM:



Review of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal finding appellant Nicolas Mojica guilty of murder and sentencing him to death penalty and the accessories.

Appellant Mojica and Primitivo Ala were charged in the said Court with having murdered prisoner Ruperto Artus y Garcia in Muntinlupa, Rizal, on the 24th day of March, 1959.

Primitivo Ala pleaded guilty to the information and was consequently sentenced to death. This Court affirmed the sentence upon review in G. R. No. L-15633.

Mojica, on the other hand, did not plead guilty. So trial proceeded, after which he was found guilty as charged, and sentenced to death.

As stated, this is a review of the judge’s decision.

It appears that at about 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon of March 24, 1959, Gabriel Buclating, one of the leaders of the "OXO gang" 1 was stabbed to death by certain members of the "Sigue-sigue gang" 2 inside the New Bilibid Prisons at Muntinlupa, Rizal. To avenge the death of such leader, a member of the "Sigue-sigue gang", a prisoner named Ruperto Artus was stabbed to death two hours thereafter (at about 6:00 p.m.) in Cell No. 1 of Dormitory No. 3-C of the said prisons. Immediately after the stabbing of said Artus, Nicolas Mojica and Primitivo Ala, both prisoners and members of the "OXO gang" offered to surrender to the prison guard, Jose Magkalas. Before they were brought out of the cell, they were ordered by said Magkalas to throw out of the window of the cell, the weapons used in the killing, an ice-pick and a flat and pointed instrument. Both accused, upon coming out of the cell, had blood on their clothes and hands. At the time Mojica, inside the cell, expressed willingness to surrender to the prison guard, he was holding in his hands, the flat and pointed instrument, Exh. "A." Both prisoners admitted having stabbed and killed the prisoner Artus. Benito Geronimo, the officer-in-charge of the security guards, took their confession in writing, and the same was subscribed and sworn to before the Assistant Director of Prisons. Another prison guard, Benjamin Aman witnessed the investigation and the taking down of the confession.

In Mojica’s confession, it is related that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"This afternoon at about 6:00 p.m., 24 March 1959, after having heard that one of our leaders in the OXO gang, GABRIEL BUCLATIN was stabbed to death by members of the Sigue-Sigue gang, I and prisoner PRIMITIVO ALA decided to kill a tagalog prisoner inside our dormitory called RUPERTO ARTUS in revenge to the death of our leaders.

Q. How did you effect the killing of Ruperto Artus?

A. While Artus was standing inside Cell No. 1 of Dormitory 3-C, I immediately stabbed him on the waist followed by my co-prisoner Primitivo Ala with the use of an improvised weapon made out of steel drum.

Q. How many times did you stab prisoner Artus?

A. Four times, sir.

Q. In what part of the person of Artus was hit?

A. On the stomach and on his sides.

Q. When did you decide to kill Artus?

A. We decided to kill Artus immediately after the killing of Buclatin at about 4:15 p.m., 24 March 1959.

x       x       x


Q. Why did you want to kill Artus, had you any altercation or misunderstanding with him?

A. We had no ill-feeling against each other, I only want to revenge the killing of Mayor Abing meaning Gabriel Buclatin.

x       x       x


Q. Are you a member of the OXO gang?

A. Yes, sir, I have a tatoo with number 11 as membership of the gang.

Q. When did you join the OXO gang?

A. In 1957, sir.

Q. Do you have something more to say, add, or retract from this statement?

A. No more, sir.

Q. Are you willing to sign this statement?

A. Yes, sir." (Exh. B).

x       x       x


During the trial, Mojica admitted being a member of the "OXO gang." He, however, denied the commission of the crime, claiming that he had signed the extrajudicial confession because he had been beaten by men in khaki pants whose identities he did not know. He further claimed that his surrender was, likewise, only forced upon him by leaders of the "OXO gang", namely Fortunato Birotiao, Cresencio de la Cruz, Francisco Brillantes and Rodolfo Ibañez; that these threatened him with death should he refuse to admit the killing. He explained that his hands had blood in them because his co-accused, Primitivo Ala smeared them with his (Ala’s) bloody hands.

Upon review of the records, we find substantial evidence corroborating the extrajudicial confession of Mojica. The murder weapon he described in the extrajudicial confession was the very same weapon he was seen holding in his hands inside the prison cell by prison guard, Jose Magkalas, and the same weapon which appellant Mojica threw out of the cell window upon orders of the prison guard. In this extra-judicial confession, he admitted having stabbed the deceased on the sides and the stomach. The deceased was found to have suffered stab wounds on said parts. Moreover, those parts of appellant Mojica’s narration (in the extra-judicial confession) concerning the participation of his co-accused, Ala, (aside from the fact that said co-accused confessed to the crime before the lower court and was thereby convicted), are also corroborated by the testimony of the prison guard, Jose Magkalas.

As to the voluntariness of the execution of the extrajudicial confession, there is no question that it had been voluntarily made. The statement was subscribed and sworn to before the Acting Assistant Director of Prisons before whom appellant could have complained had there really been any irregularity, or any violence used upon him. Furthermore, appellant could not identify the people who allegedly forced him to execute the admission. As to his surrender to the prison guard thru intimidation by the leaders of the "OXO GANG", his explanation is unconvincing. He could have sought protection from the prison authorities once he was out of the cell; he could have revealed to the same, the frame-up against him, and pleaded for separation from the vicious gang. The explanation relative to the blood on his hands contradicted the testimony of his co-accused Ala. While Mojica said that it was Ala who had placed blood on his hands, the latter (Ala) said that it was Fortunato Birotiao who placed blood on the hands of Mojica. The presence, though, of blood on Mojica’s clothes was not at all explained.

The testimony of Primitivo Ala pointing to Fortunato Birotiao, Jose Garcia, Rodolfo Ibañez and Francisco Brillantes as the perpetrators of the crime is completely inconsistent with his plea of guilt when he was arraigned for said crime in the lower court. When his judgment of conviction was brought before this Court en consulta on case G. R. No. L-15633, 3 we found upon study of the case that he had adequate knowledge of the nature of the charge against him, of the meaning of his plea of guilt and of the consequences hereof. And we affirmed the judgment of conviction against him.

The element of conspiracy attended the commission of the instant crime. Both the extra-judicial confessions of appellant and of convict Primitivo Ala as well as the latter’s judicial confession contain statements to the effect that they had agreed to kill the deceased Artus to avenge the death of a leader of the "OXO gang." The circumstance of evident premeditation attended the commission of the crime. There is ample evidence of how and why the crime was planned, sufficient time 4 having been shown to intervene between its inception and execution. There is also treachery. Two men stabbing another forty times in vital parts of the body cannot but insure the death of the latter. Also, the attack on the victim was sudden. As Mojica has described in his extra-judicial confession, the victim was just standing inside the said cell when appellant suddenly stabbed him on the waist followed by his co-accused Primitivo Ala.

Considering that Primitivo Ala, appellant’s co-accused has been sentenced to die, (despite his judicial confession which is a mitigation), considering that conspiracy has been shown, and considering that the crime was committed while the accused was serving sentence, the extreme penalty of death necessarily is in order.

The judgment en consulta is affirmed in all parts and respects.

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

Endnotes:



1. The "OXO gang" is composed of prisoners from the Visayan provinces.

2. The "Sigue-sigue gang" is composed of prisoners from Luzon.

3. Decided August 31, 1960

4. From the death of a leader of the "OXO gang" at about 4:15 to about 6:00 p.m. of March 24, 1959, there is sufficient time to plan and reflect on the commission of the crime.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1964 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-14077 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODULO RIVERAL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-15470 March 31, 1964 - CONNELL BROS. CO. (PHIL.) v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-15598 & 15726 March 31, 1964 - CONRADO HABAÑA, ET AL v. JOSE T. IMBO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-16018 March 31, 1964 - JOSE BUMANGLAG v. MELECIO BARAOIDAN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-16152 March 31, 1964 - JOSE T. ARIVE SR. v. HON. VICENTE S. TUASON

  • G.R. No. L-16243 March 31, 1964 - MANILA YELLOW TAXICAB Co. v. FRANCISCA VILUAN

  • G.R. No. L-16466 March 31, 1964 - PLYWOOD INDUSTRIES, INC. v. JOSE ARAÑAS

  • G.R. No. L-16991 March 31, 1964 - ROBERTO LAPERAL, JR., ET AL. v. RAMON L. KATIGBAK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17032 March 31, 1964 - INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH AMERICA v. UNITED STATES LINES CO., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17074 March 31, 1964 - NAT’L. MARKETING CORP. v. HON. BIENVENIDO TAN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17085 March 31, 1964 - LUZON BROKERAGE CO. v. LUZON LABOR UNION

  • G.R. No. L-17234 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOLAS G. MOJICA

  • G.R. No. L-17629 March 31, 1964 - GREGORIO ROBLES v. CONCEPCION FERNANDO BLAYLOCK

  • G.R. No. L-17790 March 31, 1964 - LORENZO LIM, ET AL v. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA

  • G.R. No. L-17847 March 31, 1964 - MANUEL A. Q. SORIANO v. FIDEL SAHAGUN

  • G.R. No. L-18046 March 31, 1964 - PAULINO M. CASTRILLO, ET AL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18289 March 31, 1964 - ANDRES ROMERO v. MAIDEN FORM BRASSIERE CO., INC., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18354 March 31, 1964 - CHENG BAN YEK CO., INC. v. AUDITOR GENERAL

  • G.R. No. L-18492 March 31, 1964 - MAMERTO TUBERA, ET AL. v. MARGARITA FERNANDO

  • G.R. No. L-18517 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORENZO CANDAVA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18616 March 31, 1964 - VICENTE M. COLEONGCO v. EDUARDO L. CLAPAROLS

  • G.R. No. L-18664 March 31, 1964 - ISMAEL CALMA v. HON. JUDGE DOMINGO M. CABAÑGON, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18799 March 31, 1964 - HON. JOSE F. FERNANDEZ, ET AL v. HERMINIO MARAVILLA

  • G.R. No. L-18897 March 31, 1964 - MAXIMA NIETO DE COMILANG v. ABDON DELENELA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18899 March 31, 1964 - IN RE: SIXTO MAGDALUYO, ET AL. v. ACTING DIRECTOR, NBI

  • G.R. No. L-19098 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PLACIDO SUSANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19115 March 31, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. MANILA PORT SERVICE

  • G.R. No. L-19254 March 31, 1964 - BENGUET CONSOLIDATED, INC. v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

  • G.R. No. L-19349 March 31, 1964 - FELICISIMO B. SERRANO, ET AL. v. NAT’L. SCIENCE DEV’T. BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19358-59 March 31, 1964 - CITY OF MANILA v. VENANCIO BACAY, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19389 March 31, 1964 - VALENTIN EDUQUE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19557 March 31, 1964 - MANILA ELECTRIC CO. v. PASCUAL ORTAÑEZ, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19568 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE L. CHUPECO

  • G.R. No. L-19619 March 31, 1964 - PRISCO ILAGAN v. MACARIO ADAME, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19629 and L-19672-92 March 31, 1964 - GUILLERMO PONCE v. MARCELO GUEVARRA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19654 March 31, 1964 - EMILIANO LUSTRE, ET AL v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19799 March 31, 1964 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. PAULINO MANUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20137 March 31, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO AMIL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-21991 March 31, 1964 - LUIS ASISTIO, ET AL. v. HON. LOURDES P. SAN DIEGO

  • G.R. No. L-22342 March 31, 1964 - HADJI AZIZ LUMNA TANGO v. HON. CRISTOBAL ALEJANDRO, ET AL