US v Manalinde

FACTS:
Juan Igual (Spaniard) was seated in front of a store
when Manalinde attacked him from behind and wounded
him on the head with a kris. Meanwhile, Choa was just
passing along the street, was just putting his load in
front of the store and was about to enter, when
Manalinde attacked him with the kris and severely
wounded him on the left shoulder. Both men were taken
to the hospital where the Chinaman died within an hour.
Respondent was charged with murder for the death of
the Chinaman. When arrested, Manalinde pleaded guilty.
He confessed that his wife died 100 days before and that
Datu Rajamudah Mupuck actually ordered him to go
juramentado in Cotabato in order to kill somebody
because Mupuck had certain grievances to avenge
against a lieutenant and a sergeant.
Manalindes reward once he accomplished the task
was a pretty woman. In case he gets caught, Manalinde
was ordered by Mupuck to say that he performed the act
in accordance to the orders of Maticayo, Datto Piang,
Tambal and Inug.
To carry out his plan, he provided himself with a kris,
which he concealed in banana leaves. He travelled day
and night before arriving at the town and going
juramentado.
The respondent further confessed that he had no quarrel
with the assaulted persons.
ISSUE:
W/N the the crime perpetrated qualifies for aggravating
circumstances

HELD/RATIO:
YES. The crime was committed with treachery and
premeditation. Treachery was committed because the
accused attacked the deceased when the latter was unable to
defend himself or even to flee from the danger. The accused
performed the act of his own volition and with the knowledge
of the irreparable damage that he would inflict upon others.
Premeditation was present in the sense that upon accepting
the order and undertaking the journey in order to comply with
the said order, the accused deliberately considered and
carefully and thoughtfully meditated over the nature and
consequences of the acts which he was about to carry out. He
even provided himself with a weapon (even going to the
extent of concealing the weapon by wrapping it up) and
travelling for a day and a night for the sole purpose of taking
the life of two unfortunate persons whom he did not know
and with whom he had never any trouble. The crime was
considered to be premeditated since it was evident that there
was a firm and persistent intention of the accused from the
moment when he first received the order until the crime was
committed. No mitigating circumstance can be afforded to
the accused because his act was not a matter of proper
obedience. His allegation that he acted according to the
Datus order cannot exculpate him because it is the
barbarous and savage custom of a juramentado to kill anyone
without any motive or reason whatever, and as such, it
cannot be accepted or considered under the laws of civilized
nations. Such exhibitions of ferocity and savagery must be
restrained.