People v. Cordero
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The case involves a charge of Robbery with Homicide against Gary Salvosa. The accused, including Edgar Cordero, Ernesto Pinlac, Jimmy Salazar, and others, allegedly conspired to rob Salvosa of various items, including a Nissan pickup, firearms, and cash, and in the process, fatally stabbed him. The incident occurred in the penthouse of the GP building, which Salvosa owned and occasionally resided in. The crime was characterized by the use of violence and intimidation, with the victim's hands tied and his body discovered with multiple stab wounds and ligature marks. Procedural History: The accused were charged before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Baguio City. Edgar Cordero and Domingo Batac pleaded guilty upon arraignment. Marlon Angco was later discharged to become a state witness. After trial, the RTC rendered a decision on January 21, 1993, finding Edgar Cordero, Ernesto Pinlac, Jimmy Salazar, Domingo Batac, and Fred Batac guilty as principals, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua. Sales Sabado was convicted as an accomplice, and Elpidio Batac was acquitted. The RTC also ordered the appellants to pay civil damages to the heirs of Gary Salvosa. The accused found guilty appealed the decision. The Appeal: The remaining appellants, excluding Jimmy Salazar who withdrew his appeal, challenged the RTC's decision. Their main contentions included the alleged error in discharging Marlon Angco as a state witness, arguing he was the most guilty. They also questioned the conviction of Sales Sabado as an accomplice and Ernesto Pinlac's conviction, asserting the trial court gave undue credence to the prosecution's version over the defense. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence, including the testimony of Marlon Angco and the conspiracy among the accused. The Court affirmed the conviction of most appellants but modified the sentence of Sales Sabado to reclusion perpetua, finding him a co-conspirator. The Court also modified the award for damages, specifically correcting the computation for loss of earning capacity and actual damages.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in discharging Marlon Angco as a state witness. Whether the testimony of Marlon Angco is credible. Whether appellant Sales Sabado should have been convicted as an accomplice or as a principal. Whether appellant Ernesto Pinlac's participation in the conspiracy was sufficiently established. Whether the defense of alibi presented by appellants Pinlac and Fred Batac is tenable. Whether the appellants are guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. Whether the damages awarded by the trial court were computed correctly.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of appellants Edgar Cordero, Ernesto Pinlac, Jimmy Salazar, Domingo Batac, and Fred Batac for robbery with homicide, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua. It modified the conviction of Sales Sabado to that of a principal, also sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The Court affirmed the acquittal of Elpidio Batac. The awards for damages were modified. The dispositive portion states: "We affirm the judgment of the trial court subject to the following: 1. Appellant Sales Sabado alias "Sonny", being a co-conspirator, should suffer reclusion perpetua. 2. Appellants are ordered to pay the legal heirs of the victim: (a) P77,329.00 as actual damages; and (b) P1,300,000.00 for the victim's loss of earning capacity. Costs against appellants."
Ratio Decidendi
On the discharge of Marlon Angco as a state witness: The Court held that the discharge of Marlon Angco was in accordance with Section 9, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court. The prosecution has the initial discretion to determine who should be a state witness, and the court ultimately determines if the statutory requirements are met. The trial court found that Marlon did not appear to be the most guilty, as he did not participate in the robbery with homicide from the start, only learned of it belatedly, hid during its commission, and importantly, revealed the group's activities to the authorities. His testimony was corroborated in material points and he had not been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. The Court emphasized that the power to prosecute includes the discretion to determine testimonial evidence needed for successful prosecution. On the credibility of Marlon Angco's testimony: The Court reiterated the principle that the matter of determining witness credibility is primarily the trial court's task, and its findings are accorded great weight. The trial court observed that Marlon's testimony was sincere, given unhesitatingly and straightforwardly, full of details that could not be a result of afterthought, and that his demeanor exuded truthfulness. The Supreme Court found no reason to overturn this assessment, noting that while Marlon was a participant, his revelation of the crime to his brother was crucial in the apprehension of the suspects. On the conviction of Sales Sabado as an accomplice: The Court found that Sabado participated in conspiring to commit the crime. The records showed he was responsible for forming Pinlac's group, designated who should accompany Pinlac to Baguio, joined the celebration after the heist, and boasted about his planning capabilities. The Court ruled that in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all, and therefore, Sabado should have been convicted not merely as an accomplice but as a principal, thus deserving the penalty of reclusion perpetua. On appellant Ernesto Pinlac's participation in the conspiracy: The Court rejected Pinlac's contention that his participation was not established. Conspiracy need not be proved by direct evidence; it can be inferred from the conduct of the accused before, during, and after the commission of the crime, showing they acted in unison with a common criminal purpose. Pinlac's house served as a meeting place, he inquired about proceeding with the plan, drove his jeep to the scene, parked near it, waited for his companions, and gave them a ride home. Furthermore, a stolen Uzi was pledged by him, and the stolen shotgun was found in his jeep. His defense of alibi was also found weak. On the defense of alibi: The Court found the alibi of Fred Batac and Pinlac to be weak. They claimed to be at the boarding house of Pinlac's children between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., but the crime was committed between 8:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. of the same day. The Court reiterated that for alibi to prosper, it must be proven by clear and convincing evidence that it was physically impossible for the accused to have been at the scene of the crime. Their claimed presence at the boarding house did not preclude their presence at the crime scene. On the guilt of the appellants for robbery with homicide: The Court found no doubt that the appellants were guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. The concerted acts of the accused, their common criminal intent, and the roles each played in the commission of the crime established their conspiracy and guilt. The Court found the defense's narrative incredible, pointing out inconsistencies and Pinlac's failure to report the crime despite his alleged anger and fear of implication, and his subsequent lending of his jeep and a stolen firearm. On the computation of damages: The Court reviewed the computation of damages. For loss of earning capacity, it corrected the trial court's calculation from 19 years to 26 years using the formula (2/3 x [80 - age of the victim at the time of death]), resulting in an award of P1,300,000.00. For actual damages, it disallowed P9,000.00 spent on investigation and P42.00 for snacks, reducing the award to P77,329.00, consistent with the guidelines in People vs. Degoma and Taborada.
Main Doctrine
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for robbery with homicide, holding that conspiracy can be inferred from the concerted acts of the accused, and that the discharge of a state witness is within the discretion of the prosecution and the court, provided statutory requirements are met. The Court also modified the awards for damages.