People v. Carugal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On December 27, 1994, at approximately 7:30 PM, while driving a passenger jeepney along North Bay Boulevard, Navotas, the driver Leonilo Apostol was held up by four armed passengers. During the holdup, one of the passengers was stabbed. The assailants, armed with bladed weapons, forcibly took a Super 38 caliber pistol from the victim, identified as PO1 Fernando Salao, who subsequently died from his wounds. The accused Santiago Carugal and Efren Espinosa, Jr. were arrested, while two other John Does remained at large. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court, Branch 72, Malabon, Metro Manila, convicted Santiago Carugal and Efren Espinosa, Jr. of robbery with homicide. They were sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to indemnify the heirs of the victim. Only Santiago Carugal appealed the decision. The Petition: The accused-appellant Santiago Carugal raised two main errors: (1) the trial court's reliance on the testimony of Leonilo Apostol, alleging inconsistencies and questionable identification, and (2) the failure to appreciate newspaper reports identifying another individual, Joey Abarquez, as the killer of PO1 Salao.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in relying on the testimony of the prosecution witness Leonilo Apostol for the positive identification of the accused-appellant. Whether newspaper reports identifying another individual as the killer of PO1 Fernando Salao should have been appreciated by the trial court.
Ruling
The appeal is dismissed, and the decision of the trial court finding accused-appellant Santiago Carugal guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of robbery with homicide is affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of positive identification: The Court affirmed the trial court's reliance on the testimony of Leonilo Apostol. Apostol positively identified Santiago Carugal and Efren Espinosa, Jr. as among the hold-uppers. The Court found Apostol's identification to be explicit and credible, noting that he described the incident as "extraordinary" and stated he could not forget the faces of the holduppers. The sworn statement executed the day after the incident also corroborated his identification, detailing the well-lit conditions during the crime and his ability to get a closer look at the suspects. The Court reiterated that positive testimony is stronger than negative testimony, and alibi becomes worthless in the face of positive identification. Furthermore, the defense failed to establish that it was physically impossible for Carugal to be at the scene of the crime, as he admitted the Navotas Fishport, where he claimed to be, was a short ride from the crime scene. The Court found no ill motive for Apostol to falsely implicate Carugal. On the issue of newspaper reports: The Court found the defense's reliance on newspaper reports identifying Joey Abarquez as the killer to be untenable. These reports were classified as hearsay evidence with no probative value. The authors of the reports had no personal knowledge of the perpetrators' identities, obtaining information solely from police investigators. The recovery of PO1 Salao's firearm from Abarquez was not conclusive proof of his involvement in the December 27, 1994 incident. The Court agreed with the trial court's observation that the gun could have reached Abarquez through other means, such as purchase from the unapprehended holduppers or by picking it up after it was discarded. Therefore, these reports did not negate the guilt of the accused.
Main Doctrine
In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of the other co-conspirators, and therefore, it is of no moment that an accused has not taken part in the actual commission of every act constituting the crime. The precise modality or extent of participation of each individual conspirator becomes secondary since the act of one is the act of all.