People of the Philippines vs.

Alfonso Oñate
G.R. No. L-27481, July 29, 1977

FACTS:
On October 15, 1966, defendant-appellant Alfonso Oñate alias Bukay alleges that we was
drinking ‘tuba’ with his companions and deceased Jose Ventosa. He adds that the latter left
without paying his drink, so the appellant promised to collect said payment. Along with his
companions, he saw the deceased and approached. Ventosa refused and laid his hands upon
the appellant, so fearing for his life, the latter pulled out a knife and stabbed the deceased.

However, these events were denied by eyewitnesses. Instead, one stated that the deceased
came to the store but left due to Oñate consuming all the ‘tuba.’ The appellant then, without
saying a word, stabbed the deceased.

Thus, defendant-appellant was found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime murder. The
killing was attended by the qualifying circumstance, and in the absence of any mitigating or
aggravating circumstance, the penalty shall be imposed in its medium period. Hence, he was
sentenced to cadena perpetua (should be reclusion perpetua).

During the trial, appellant pleaded guilty to the crime of homicide but was rejected. Hence, this
appeal where he assails that 1) the lower court erred in rejecting his voluntary surrender as a
mitigating circumstance and 2) that the qualifying circumstance of stabbing as murder.

ISSUE: WON the lower court erred by not taking into consideration the appellant’s voluntary
surrender and qualifying circumstance of stabbing as murder in calculating his penalty.

RULING:
YES. Although appellant capitalizes on alleged discrepancies in details between testimonies,
there is no doubt that he was guilty of the crime charged, qualified by “alevosia” or the act of
deliberate betrayal. However, he must also still be credited with the mitigating circumstance of
voluntary surrender. Thus, the appellant is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of
imprisonment ranging from 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 18 years,
2 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as maximum.

However, due to the age1 of the appellant and the purpose and intent of ISLAW (to uplift and
redeem valuable human material, and prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of
personal liberty and economic usefulness), Alfonso Oñate is sentenced to 10 years and 1 day of
prision mayor to 17 years, 4 months, and 2 days of reclusion temporal. The minimum number of
years is set to give sufficient incentive for the appellant to rehabilitate himself morally and
socially.

1
Age as well as general health and physical condition, mentality, previous conduct, previous
education, proclivities for usefulness or injury to society, demeanor during trial, manner and
circumstances which the crime was committed, and gravity of the offense are factors considered
in ISLAW.