Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-46612 October 14, 1939
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
TEODULO YECLA, ET AL., defendants.
DALMACIO CAHILIG, appellant.
Jose A. Urquiola for appellant.
Office of the Solicitor-General Ozaeta and Assistant Attorney Cuyugan for appellee.
AVANCEÑA, C.J.:
The appellant was sentenced by the Court of First Instance of Capiz for the crime of homicide to the penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. In imposing this penalty, the Court did not take into account the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender by the appellant. The appeal was taken only because the Court did not consider this mitigating circumstance.
It is admitted that five days after the commission of the crime and two days after the issuance of the order for the arrest of the appellant, the latter presented himself in the municipal building to post the bond for his temporary release. We hold that this voluntary surrender constitutes a mitigating circumstance under paragraph 7 of article 13 of the Revised Penal Code.
The fact that the order of arrest of the appellant had already been issued is no bar to the consideration of this circumstance, because the law does not require that the surrender be prior to the order of arrest.lâwphi1.nêt
Moreover, the surrender of the appellant to post a bond for his temporary release was in obedience to the order of arrest and was tantamount to the delivery of his person to the authorities to answer for the crime for which his arrest was ordered.
Modifying the appealed judgment, we hold that there should be taken into account the mitigating circumstance that the accused voluntarily surrendered to the authorities, and considering that he also spontaneously pleaded guilty before the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution, the penalty imposable is that immediately lower to the prescribed by law, that is, four years of prision correccional, as the minimum, to eight years of prision mayor, as the maximum, provided that indemnity due to the heirs of the deceased be P2,000 under Commonwealth Act No. 284, and the appealed judgment is affirmed in all other respects, with the costs. So ordered.
Villa-Real, Imperial, Diaz, Laurel, Concepcion, and Moran, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
