G.R. No. 187536 ; August 10, 2011
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MICHAEL BOKINGO alias “MICHAEL BOKINGCO” and REYNANTE COL, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging appellants Michael Bokingco and Reynante Col with Murder for the killing of Noli Pasion on February 29, 2000, in Angeles City. The charge alleged conspiracy, use of a claw hammer, and the qualifying circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, abuse of confidence, and nighttime. Bokingco initially pleaded guilty, while Col pleaded not guilty. Pasion was the employer of the appellants, who were construction workers staying in one of his apartment units.
The prosecution evidence established that around 1:00 a.m., Dante Vitalicio (Pasion’s brother-in-law) heard a commotion from Apartment No. 3. He peeped inside and saw Bokingco hitting something on the floor. Bokingco then attacked Vitalicio with a hammer, leading to a struggle. Meanwhile, Pasion’s wife, Elsa, heard banging and moans. When she went to investigate, Col blocked her way, sprayed tear gas on her, poked a sharp object at her, and demanded she open the pawnshop vault. Bokingco then opened a screen door and told Col, “tara, patay na siya.” Col released Elsa, and both appellants fled. Pasion was found dead in the apartment’s kitchen, bathed in blood. A claw hammer was found near the sink. The necropsy report detailed multiple fatal wounds on Pasion’s head and body, including skull fractures and brain tissue damage.
Bokingco testified that Pasion, appearing intoxicated, woke him and hit him first, prompting Bokingco to grab a hammer and fight back in a struggle. He admitted harboring ill feelings towards Pasion. Col claimed he had resigned and was in Cainta, Rizal, at the time, and was only implicated when Bokingco pointed at him upon arrest.
The trial court found both appellants guilty of Murder, considering the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of confidence, and a mitigating circumstance of a plea of guilty for Bokingco only, and initially imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals, in its Amended Decision, affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of appellants Michael Bokingco and Reynante Col for the crime of Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Amended Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATIONS to the awards of damages.
The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy between Bokingco and Col. Conspiracy was deduced from their coordinated actions: Col guarded the main house and assaulted Elsa Pasion to facilitate the crime, while Bokingco directly attacked and killed the victim. Bokingco’s statement (“tara, patay na siya”) indicated a common purpose, and their simultaneous flight confirmed joint responsibility. The claim that Col had already resigned was deemed a weak denial insufficient to overcome positive identification and the evidence of conspiracy.
The Court agreed that the killing was qualified by treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, employing a hammer to the head, which rendered the victim defenseless and unable to retaliate. The severity and location of the wounds supported this conclusion. However, the Court did not find abuse of confidence or nighttime sufficiently proven as aggravating circumstances. Abuse of confidence requires a relation of trust, which was not clearly established beyond their being employees. Nighttime was not shown to have been deliberately sought to facilitate the crime.
The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed, as the killing was Murder qualified by treachery, with no other modifying circumstances present. The awards for damages were modified in line with prevailing jurisprudence: Civil Indemnity was increased to P75,000; Moral Damages to P75,000; and Exemplary Damages of P30,000 were awarded due to the presence of treachery. Actual damages were deleted for lack of substantiation, but Temperate Damages of P25,000 were granted in lieu thereof. All monetary awards were subject to 6% interest per annum from finality of judgment until full payment.