G.R. No. 64414 November 15, 1989
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SABINO VERONAS, RODRIGO CAÑETE, NELSON C. ABALA and ANACLETO ASISTER, alias “ANNIE,” defendants, NELSON C. ABALA and ANACLETO ASISTER, alias “ANNIE,” appellants.

FACTS

On November 20, 1980, in Barili, Cebu, appellants Nelson Abala and Anacleto Asister, along with Sabino Veronas and Rodrigo Cañete, were charged with robbery with rape and double less serious physical injuries. The victims, sisters Marciana Legaspi (65) and Demetria Mancao (54), were attacked in their home. Veronas, Abala, and Cañete entered the house under a full moon; Veronas assaulted and gagged Demetria, while Abala and Cañete hogtied Marciana, robbed her of cash and valuables, and then both successively raped her. During the robbery, Abala was heard muttering, “According to Annie, she is wealthy, but there is nothing,” and later left to consult with someone outside. After the perpetrators fled, the sisters freed themselves and saw Asister sitting silently nearby.
The accused were apprehended and positively identified. During trial, Abala and Veronas admitted their roles and testified that Asister masterminded the crime. They revealed that Asister, bearing a grudge against Marciana for a perceived unfair share from a carabao sale, invited them to drink, proposed the robbery, guided them to the house, and waited outside during its commission. Asister presented an alibi, claiming he was farming and later attended a barangay procession.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant Anacleto Asister as a co-conspirator in the crime of robbery with rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centers on the doctrine of conspiracy. The trial court’s findings, based on the credible and candid testimonies of the victims and the interlocking confessions of Asister’s co-accused, established conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Evidence showed Asister conceived the plan due to a personal grudge, induced his companions with alcohol, led them to the victim’s house, and remained stationed outside during the crime, manifesting a community of criminal purpose.
In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. Each conspirator is liable for all crimes committed by the others in furtherance of the common design, unless there is proof of an attempt to prevent the crime. Here, Asister not only failed to prevent the rape but his presence and prior actions facilitated the entire criminal enterprise. His alibi was correctly rejected as inherently weak and unsupported by clear evidence, especially against the positive identification by witnesses and the damning statements of his cohorts. The Court also upheld the denial of his motion for new trial, as the retraction of his co-accused’s testimonies post-conviction is not a valid ground. Thus, Asister is equally guilty of robbery with rape.