GR 137042; (June, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 137042 ; June 17, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. FELIPE MUSA, JR., SILVERIO MANJARES, JR. (deceased), ALLAN REOLO, RANDY LLENO and ANGELO MABINI, Accused. FELIPE MUSA, JR., ALLAN REOLO, RANDY LLENO and ANGELO MABINI, Appellants.
FACTS
The appellants, together with the deceased Silverio Manjares Jr., were charged with Murder for the death of Zaldy Marifosque. The prosecution evidence established that on July 17, 1998, the appellants pelted the house of the Marifosque brothers with stones. The victims reported the incident to the father of appellant Musa, who disciplined his son. While the brothers were walking home, the appellants suddenly emerged. Musa, Lleno, and Manjares hurled stones at Zaldy, hitting him in the face and causing him to fall, while Reolo and Mabini stood by holding stones. A barangay tanod witnessed the attack and saw five men standing over the fallen victim before fleeing. Zaldy died the following day from massive internal bleeding due to head trauma. The defense claimed the victim and his brother were the aggressors, attacking Musa with a lead pipe, which Musa countered by throwing a single stone in self-defense.
ISSUE
The core issues were whether the killing was attended by treachery, whether conspiracy was proven, and whether the guilt of the appellants was established beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder. The legal logic centered on the concurrence of conspiracy and treachery. Conspiracy was deduced from the appellants’ collective and simultaneous actions—stoning the house together, pursuing the victims, and jointly executing the fatal assault. Their coordinated conduct demonstrated a unity of purpose to attack the victims. Treachery (alevosia) was correctly appreciated. The attack was sudden and unexpected, executed in a manner that rendered the victim defenseless. The fact that an earlier confrontation had occurred did not negate treachery, as the final assault was launched from a distance with stones while the victim was walking home, giving him no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate. The Court found the prosecution witnesses credible and their positive identification of the appellants conclusive, thereby rejecting the self-defense claim which was unsupported by evidence. The penalty was modified regarding damages, awarding civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages, and properly computed loss of earning capacity.