People v. Yulo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On January 2, 2005, Felix Sabasan y Magango was stabbed multiple times outside his house in Antipolo City. Mark Anthony Yulo y Gallo (Yulo) and Mark Ryan Bueno y Corona (Bueno) were identified as the suspects. A blood-stained ice pick was recovered from Yulo. An Information for murder was filed against them, alleging conspiracy, abuse of superior strength, and treachery. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Yulo and Bueno guilty of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, with solidary indemnification for damages. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction, increasing the damages. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court. The Petition: Accused-appellants argued that the CA erred in finding them guilty, questioning the credibility of eyewitnesses, the admissibility of Felix's statement, and the finding of treachery and abuse of superior strength.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution sufficiently proved the guilt of the accused-appellants for the crime of murder. Whether treachery attended the commission of the crime. Whether abuse of superior strength attended the commission of the crime. Whether Felix Sabasan's statement identifying his assailants is admissible as a dying declaration or part of the res gestae. Whether conspiracy was present and whether the damages awarded are proper.
Ruling
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction of Mark Anthony Yulo y Gallo and Mark Ryan Bueno y Corona for murder is affirmed with modification. They are ordered to solidarily pay the heirs of Felix Sabasan y Magango P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, in addition to P107,600.00 as actual damages and P1,872,000.00 as loss of earning capacity, all subject to legal interest.
Ratio Decidendi
On the guilt of the accused-appellants: The Court found that the prosecution proved the guilt of Yulo and Bueno beyond reasonable doubt. Eyewitness Lucena Abayon positively identified them, describing how Bueno held Felix while Yulo stabbed him. The area was illuminated by street lamps, allowing for clear identification. The Court also gave credence to Cristy Cardinal's testimony regarding Yulo's admission of guilt, classifying it as an admission against interest. Felix Sabasan's statement to his father, Nehemias, identifying his attackers, was also considered. The Court noted that Yulo was found in possession of a blood-stained ice pick, further corroborating his involvement. On the presence of treachery: The Court ruled that treachery was not present. Treachery requires that the attack be deliberate and without warning, affording the victim no chance to resist or escape. In this case, there was a chase before Felix was caught, indicating he had an initial chance to escape. The attack occurred after Felix stumbled, meaning the accused simply took advantage of the victim's fall, rather than consciously adopting a specific treacherous method of attack. On the presence of abuse of superior strength: The Court found that the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength attended the killing. This circumstance is present when there is an inequality of force between the victim and the aggressors, and the latter take advantage of it. The accused-appellants teamed up to launch a simultaneous attack against the unarmed and defenseless Felix. Bueno and an unidentified person held Felix immobile while Yulo stabbed him multiple times, demonstrating their intent to overwhelm him with superior force. On the admissibility of Felix's statement: The Court held that Felix's statement to his father, identifying Yulo and Bueno, could not be admitted as a dying declaration because there was no showing that Felix harbored a fixed belief of his inevitable and imminent death at the time he made the statement. However, it was admissible as part of the res gestae. The stabbing was a startling occurrence, Felix identified his attackers moments after the attack before he had time to contrive a false accusation, and the statement concerned the stabbing incident itself. On conspiracy and the penalty and damages: The Court affirmed that conspiracy was present. Conspiracy is established by the concerted acts of the accused pointing to a joint purpose and design. Bueno's participation in holding Felix immobile while Yulo stabbed him demonstrated his active participation in the common design to kill the victim. Under the principle that the act of one is the act of all in conspiracy, Bueno is equally liable as a principal. The penalty for murder is reclusion perpetua to death. Since abuse of superior strength was present, the crime is murder. In the absence of other aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed. The award of P107,600.00 for actual damages and P1,872,000.00 for loss of earning capacity were upheld. However, the CA's awards for moral and exemplary damages and civil indemnity were modified. Following jurisprudence, the proper amounts for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages when the penalty is reclusion perpetua are P75,000.00 each.
Main Doctrine
While treachery was not proven, the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength attended the killing, and conspiracy was established, making the accused guilty of murder. Felix Sabasan's statement identifying his assailants, though not a dying declaration, was admissible as part of the res gestae. The penalty is reclusion perpetua, with modified awards for damages.