G.R. No. 125964 October 22, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ELEUTERIO GUARIN y SALAYNON (at large), WINNIE GUARIN y SALAYNON and NOEL NATO (at large), accused, WINNIE GUARIN y SALAYNON, accused-appellant.

FACTS

An Information charged Eleuterio Guarin, Winnie Guarin, and Noel Nato with Robbery with Double Homicide for robbing and killing Enrique Tan and his 7-year-old son Aaron inside their store, Aaron Marketing, in Silay City on or about February 1, 1990. The accused were store helpers of the victims and the victims’ brother, Roque Tan. On the night of February 1, 1990, Winnie Guarin and Noel Nato asked permission from their employer Roque to go out with Eleuterio Guarin. The three were seen drinking soft drinks at a refreshment parlor before entering Aaron Marketing. The store remained closed from February 1 to 4. Upon forcibly opening the store, Roque and police found the decomposing bodies of Enrique and Aaron with severe injuries. A bag containing Eleuterio’s clothing and the victims’ valuables (watches, jewelry) was found at the scene. The three accused fled Silay City. Police apprehended Winnie Guarin in Vallehermoso, Negros Oriental, where he confessed to the crime in the presence of the barangay captain and relatives and surrendered P600, the remainder of his share of the loot. Eleuterio Guarin and Noel Nato remained at large. After trial, the Regional Trial Court convicted accused-appellant Winnie Guarin of Robbery with Homicide and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Winnie Guarin of the crime of Robbery with Homicide based on circumstantial evidence.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. Conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence if the circumstances constitute an unbroken chain leading to one reasonable conclusion proving the accused’s guilt to the exclusion of all others. The combination of the following circumstances met this standard: (1) On the night of the crime, the three accused were together and asked permission to go out, and never returned to work afterward. (2) They were seen drinking at a parlor near the store before entering it, and there were no signs of forcible entry. (3) The victims were found dead days later, with estimated time of death around February 1. (4) The accused fled Silay City immediately after the crime; the two others remained at large, indicating guilt. (5) Upon arrest, accused-appellant confessed and surrendered part of the loot, and his account of a drinking spree in Vallehermoso matched residents’ reports. (6) A bag containing the co-accused Eleuterio’s clothes and the victims’ valuables was found at the crime scene. The Court found these circumstances sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of indemnity were affirmed.