People v. Delos Santos
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On December 15, 1996, Jose Estrada was on a motorboat with his wife and son. Appellants Nomer delos Santos, Rico Ramos, Leopoldo Abarientos, and co-accused Santiago de Luna (at large) boarded the same motorboat. While on board, the group drank liquor. Appellant Nomer delos Santos moved to the rear portion of the boat, near the victim. Suddenly, a gunshot was heard, and the victim was seen bleeding from his nose and mouth. The victim's wife saw appellant Nomer delos Santos standing next to her husband, holding a gun. The other appellants, Rico Ramos and Leopoldo Abarientos, stood up holding hand grenades and ordered the passengers to keep quiet. Upon reaching Calibaya, Dalupaon, the appellants and Santiago de Luna disembarked. Appellant Nomer delos Santos pushed the boat out to sea again. When the boat reached the shore of Barangay Dalupaon, Jose Estrada was found dead. The post-mortem examination revealed a fatal gunshot wound on the victim's left temple, causing intracranial hemorrhage. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City (Branch 28) found appellants Nomer delos Santos, Rico Ramos, and Leopoldo Abarientos guilty of murder and sentenced them to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with joint and several liability for actual, indemnity, and moral damages. The Information charged them with murder, alleging conspiracy, treachery, and the use of superior strength. The Petition: Appellants Nomer delos Santos, Rico Ramos, and Leopoldo Abarientos appealed the RTC decision, assigning errors related to the sufficiency of prosecution evidence, the existence of conspiracy, and their participation therein.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution sufficiently proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Whether treachery attended the commission of the crime. Whether conspiracy was established among the appellants.
Ruling
The appeal is denied, and the assailed Decision of the RTC is affirmed. The guilt of the appellants for murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt, with treachery as a qualifying circumstance and conspiracy established by their concerted acts.
Ratio Decidendi
On the sufficiency of prosecution evidence and the guilt of the accused: The Court affirmed the trial court's finding that the prosecution established the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of the victim's son, Honesto, indicated that delos Santos stood up, pulled out his gun, and shot his father. This was corroborated by another witness, Granadel, who saw delos Santos point his gun and fire at the victim. The victim's wife, Florenia, also saw delos Santos standing with the gun in his hand immediately after the gunshot. Delos Santos' denial of carrying a gun and his claim of being an NPA detainee were deemed self-serving and inconsistent with other circumstances, such as his arrest with Ramos later and the questionable actions of Abarientos. The Court also dismissed the attempt to discredit Florenia's identification by presenting police blotter entries, stating that such entries are not evidence of the truth of their contents but merely of their recording. The positive identification by witnesses prevailed over these entries. On the presence of treachery: The Court agreed with the trial court that treachery attended the slaying. Treachery is present when the means, method, or manner of execution ensures the offender's safety from any defense or retaliatory act by the victim, and this was a deliberate choice by the offender. The deliberate, sudden, and unexpected shooting of Jose Estrada while he was fixing a fishing line afforded delos Santos the opportunity to kill him without risk of defense from the victim. This constituted a treacherous attack, qualifying the crime to murder. On the existence of conspiracy: The Court found that conspiracy was sufficiently established among the appellants. Conspiracy exists when two or more persons agree to commit an unlawful act, and this agreement can be inferred from their concerted acts in pursuit of a common unlawful design. The simultaneous arrival of the appellants, their specific actions before and after the shooting, and their simultaneous flight all pointed to a conspiracy. The argument prior to boarding, delos Santos sitting near the victim while others sat in front, the other appellants standing with hand grenades after the shot, Ramos's warning to passengers, and their simultaneous disembarkment all demonstrated a common purpose and coordinated action to commit the crime.
Main Doctrine
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement to commit an unlawful act, which agreement may be inferred from the manner in which the offense was perpetrated or from the concerted acts of the accused in the pursuit of their common unlawful design. Treachery is present when the execution of the crime ensures the offender's safety from any defense or retaliatory act by the victim and is a deliberate choice of such means.