CASE NO.

148
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
ERASMO CUADRA, accused-appellant.
85 SCRA 576, 596, October 23, 1978
FACTS:
In the year 1966, in Bacolod City, Celso Tan and his common-law-wife Edna Javelona, went to
the Globe Theatre to see a movie. After the show, the couple rode in their Opel car with Celso Tan at the
wheel stopped by DYRL radio station for around fifteen minutes, and then proceeded home to Barrio
Sum-ag at the outskirts of the city. Celso Tan did not however reach his home alive because on the way he
met with a violent death from gunshot wounds which caused severe intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Not
long after the shooting of Celso Tan, Erasmo Cuadra was arrested that same evening by the local nonce as
the suspected triggerman. CFI rendered a decision finding accused Erasmo Cuadra guilty of murder
qualified by evident premeditation and sentencing him "to suffer the extreme penalty of death" in view of
the presence of two aggravating circumstances, to wit: treachery and use of motor vehicle.
ISSUE:
Whether or not that the trial court correctly adjudged accused Erasmo guilty of MURDER
qualified by evident premeditation with two aggravating circumstances attendant to the case, viz treachery
and the use of a motor vehicle.
RULING:
YES. Treachery is present although the shooting was frontal because the attack was so sudden
and unexpected that the victim was not in a position to offer an effective defense. The ,witness Edna
Javelona testified that when Celso Tan approached the driver of the pickup, Tan was met with gunfire and
she heard him cry out "Dios ko" and this was followed by two more successive shots, after which the
pickup speeded away. Under these circumstances Celso Tan was wholly unprepared for the attack and had
no opportunity or chance to defend himself.
When the accused has decided to realize his plan of liquidating the victim, drove his pickup with
his companions, conducted a surveillance of the victims whereabouts while driving his pickup, killed the
victim upon meeting him, and made good his escape by speeding away in his vehicle, the motor vehicle
was used as means to commit the crime and to facilitate escape, which is aggravating.

CASE NO. 149

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellate,
vs.
FELICIANO MUOZ and JUSTO MILLORA, defendants-appellants
107 SCRA 313,338, September 10, 1981
Ponente: FERNANDEZ, J.:

FACTS:
Feliciano Muoz alias 'Tony' and Justo Millora alias 'Tito' of the crime of Murder committed as follows:
"That on or about the 22nd day of August 1972 at San Carlos City in Pangasinan and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, armed with firearms, conspiring together
and mutually aiding each other, with evident premeditation and treachery, with intent to kill, did then and
there, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously attack, assault and shoot one, Ricardo Depacina alias
'Carding', thereby inflicting upon the latter gunshot wounds on his head which mortal injuries caused the
death of said Ricardo Depacina, alias 'Carding', as a consequence. The lower court found the accused
guilty through the testimonies presented by the prosecution.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the trial court erred in appreciating the use of a motor vehicle as an aggravating
circumstance for the crime of murder, in determining the penalty of the accused.
RULING:
YES. The use by accused-appellants Munoz and Millora of the police patrol jeep in looking for the victim
Ricardo Depacina and in carrying his dead body to Calasiao, Pangasinan was incidental. The police patrol
jeep was not deliberately utilized to facilitate the killing of Depacina, the escape of the appellants from
the scene of the crime, and the concealment of the body of the victim. Thus, the use of motor vehicle
should not be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
The crime committed is murder qualified by treachery under Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code. There
being no aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstance, the proper penalty is reclusion
perpetua.

CASE NO. 150

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
PEDRO MIL, defendant-appellant.

92 SCRA 89, 102

Ponente: CONCEPCION, JR., J:
FACTS:
On December 22, 1966, the deceased Augusto Arteche was boxed by the accused Pedro Mil at the
Arco Iris, a nightspot in Catbalogan, Samar, where the said Augusto Arteche worked as a piano player,
causing physical injuries to Augusto Arteche. As a result, Pedro Mil was charged with the crime of less
serious physical injuries before the Municipal Court of Catbalogan, Samar. Atty. Filomeno Arteche, Jr.,
wrote a letter to Augusto Arteche to have an amicable settlement with Pedro Mil, the letter was given to
Sgt. Pedro Arcteche, but the letter was not given to Augusto Arteche. On February 12, 1967, at six oclock
while Augusto Arteche, Salvador Alba, and some friends were drinking at the Amba's Refreshment Parlor,
Pedro Mil and Sgt. and Mrs. Anicio Laparra entered the store and occupied a table near a counter. By then
Augusto Arteche informed Pablo de los Reyes and Fidel Tan of the presence of Pedro Mil and company.
Sgt. Laparra invited Augusto Arteche to their table and offered him a drink. Suddenly, Pedro Mil shouted
at Augusto Arteche: "Let's have a fight;" "Kung ganoon kailangan kang mamatay," immediately drawing
a .45 cal. pistol tucked under his belt. Augusto Arteche stood up, pleading: "Huwag huwag." at the same
time raising his hands. Nevertheless, Pedro Mil shot him, causing him to fall face downward. Upon
seeing Alba he also shot him. After escaping Pedro Mil rode a vehicle and rush towards Atty. Bohol but
when he asked a passerby the latter doesnt know where he went onwards and saw Sgt. Pedro Arteche and
his wife were seated by the window of their house at Barrio Maulong, Catbalogan, Samar. Thereupon,
Pedro Mil shot Pedro Arteche. When Trinidad Arteche asked why Pedro Mil shot her husband, Pedro Mil
pointed the gun at her and squeezed the trigger. But, the gun did not fire. Pedro Mil then ran to the
waiting tricycle and returned to the PC Camp where he surrendered to his commanding officer. Capt.
Villena. Augusto Arteche and Pedro Arteche died thereafter.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the trial court correctly found the crime of murder aggravated by aid of a motor
vehicle, as the accused took a motorized tricycle in going to the house of Pedro Arteche.
HELD:
NO. Use of motor vehicle will not be considered as an aggravating circumstance where there is
no showing that the motor vehicle as purposely used to facilitate the commission of the crime or where it

is not shown that without it, the offense charged could not have been committed. Thus, where the primary
purpose of the assailant in riding on a motorized tricycle was to return to their camp (assailant was a PC
enlistedman) after shooting a first victim and it was just incidental that on his way to the camp, he
happened to see the second victim, the circumstance is no aggravating.
CASE NO. 152
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff,
vs.
SILVERIO LUNA, defendant.
58 SCRA 198

FACTS:
Silverio Luna in band robbed the family of Eduardo Adal and the latters sons, Alfredo
Adal, in the instruction of the formers uncle and Eduardo Adals legitimate son, Pablo Adal.
After the robbery, Eduardo and Alfredo were brought in the middle of the sea. Before
overthrowing Alfredo to the sea with his hands tied, he was stabbed first. Both fought for their
lies when they were left in the middle of the sea, but only Eduardo survived.
ISSUE:
1) Whether or not Luna was not positively identified by the victims and his guilt was not proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt;
2) Whether or not crimes committed were the separate ones of robbery in band and homicide and
not
the
complex
crime
of
robbery
in
band
with
homicide;
3) Whether or not the death penalty should not be imposed.
RULING:

1) Any doubt as to Lunas complicity in the robberies, killing and frustrated killing vanishes in
the face of his confession which counsel de oficio forlore to mention in his brief. His counsel
during the trial did not object to its admission in evidence;
2) At least four members of the band should be armed in order that cuadrilla may be aggravating,
in this case, there is no proof that Pablo Adal and Virgilio Adal were armed;
3) Lack of instruction cannot be considered mitigating. Nocturnity and treachery are the
aggravating circumstance. The unusual perversity and moral callousness exhibited by Luna, a
convict, in allowing himself to be the instrument for the satisfaction of Pablo Adals vengeful
desire to injures his father and mother, justify death penalty.