People of the Philippines vs. Renato Tac-an Y.

Hipos
G.R No. 76338-39 February 26, 1990

Facts:
Accused Renato Tac-an appeals from the decision rendered by the Regional Trial Court of
Tagbilaran City convicting him of qualified illegal possession of Firearms and ammunition
pursuant to P.D 1866 and of murder imposing upon him the penalty of death for both cases. The
accused and the victim Francis Ernest Escano were friends and high school classmates. Their
relationship deteriorated since the withdrawal of the victim from the Bronx gang into which both
of them are members. On December 14 1984 the two got into a quarrel while their English class
is ongoing it was assumed settled by their teacher however the accused slipped out of the classroom
went home and get a gun, fifteen minutes later the accused burst into the room wherein their math
teacher Mr. Domosa had just started the class for such subject. The accused shut the door and with
both hands held the revolver and shouted where is Francis? Upon seeing the victim, he fired the
gun which hit different objects first before he was able to hit the victim while rushing towards the
door. Thereafter he went out and pace between the adjacent rooms and was approached by another
teacher Mr. Pablo Baluna apparently unaware that he was the one who fired at the victim, asked
the accused to help the victim as the latter was still alive, the accused thereupon returned, close
the door behind him aimed at the chest of the victim and fired once more causing his death.
Issue:

WON there has been treachery?

WON there was an evident premeditation.
WON the crime was committed in contempt of or with insult to the public authorities.

Ruling:

The court held that there has been treachery on the case at bar, the way the accused carry
over the crime manifested the accused’s conscious choice of means of execution which directly
and especially ensured the death of the victim without the risk to himself.
However, the court found no showing that the accused had formed the intention and
determination to take the life of the victim since the requisites to evident premeditation are not
present

(A) Time when the offender has clung to his determination to commit the crime
(B) Action manifestly indicating that the offender had clung to his determination to commit the
crime
(C) The passage of sufficient interval of time between the determination to commit the crime and
the actual execution of it that allows him to reflect upon the consequences of his act. Hence the
accuse get back barely 15 mins to commit the crime.

Lastly, the Highest court ruled that a teacher is not considered under the provisions of Revised
Penal Code as person of authority; it is being defined as person who are mandated by the law to
carry out such duties especially provided to them such as police officer, barangay Captain etc.