[ G.R. No. 46298. September 30, 1939 ] 68 Phil. 635
[ G.R. No. 46298. September 30, 1939 ]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. DATU AMBIS (BAGOBO), DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT. D E C I S I O N
IMPERIAL, J.:
Datu Ambis, the accused, appealed, from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Davao finding him guilty of the crime of murder qualified by treachery, and attended by the aggravating circumstance of dwelling which was compensated by the mitigating circumstance of lack of education and instruction, and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, with the accessory penalties prescribed by law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000 and to pay the costs.
When Ambrosia Puton (alias Fortunata, alias Ambuyong), became a widow, the herein accused desired to take her as one of his wives, but she declined, alleging that he already had five. The accused did not insist but he resentfully threatened her that should she marry again he would kill her second husband. Ambuyong, for the second time, married Esteban Fameron and both spouses, together with Ambuyong’s five children had with her first husband, lived in their new residence in Baracatan, municipality of Sta. Cruz, Davao. At about 7 o’clock in the evening of May 13, 1938 while both spouses were seated at the table preparing for supper and Esteban Fameron was taking some viands from a saucepan, a report of a firearm was heard and Esteban fell face downward to the floor, dead. Ambuyong looked toward the door where the report came from and to which Esteban had his back turned and saw the accused carrying a gun and leaving the place. Upon hearing the cries for help, Saito Puton, brother-in-law of Ambuyong, went to the latter’s house and on his way thereto he recognized the accused and saw the weapon carried by him. The body of the deceased was examined by sanitary inspector Manuel Jumilla who found several wounds therein all of which were produced by buckshots from a shotgun cartridge. According to him the wounds received by the deceased on the left side of the stomach, below the ribs, were mortal and produced his instantaneous death.
The accused denied having been the author of the crime, and attempted to establish the defense of alibi, which was rejected by the court. In this appeal, his attorney de oficio does not question the above-stated established facts, but maintains that the crime committed is homicide. The qualification is erroneous and is not in accordance with the facts because the crime is qualified by treachery, the deceased having been fired upon while he had his back turned, and was also attended by the aggravating circumstance of dwelling, which was correctly compensated by the mitigating circumstance of lack of education and instruction.
The crime committed by the appellant is defined by article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and punished with penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death, the medium period of which is reclusion perpetua, for which reason the penalty imposed by the court is in accordance with law.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with the cost of this instance to the appellant. So ordered.
Avanceña, C, J., Diaz, Concepcion, and Moran, JJ., concur. Villa-Real, J., see dissenting opinion. Laurel, J., concurs in the dissenting opinion of Justice Villa-Real.