GR 141943; (November, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 141943 -45 November 13, 2002
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. DIOSDADO RECEPCION Y PALASO (deceased), FELIPE DELA CRUZ Y REYES, AUDIE DONA Y BINAN, ALFREDO BARACAS Y CONCEPCION, EDUARDO PALACPAC Y ROSALES, BERNARDO RANARA Y MORATALLA (at large), JOEMARI DELOS REYES Y CONCEPCION, DOMINADOR RECEPCION Y PALASO and ROBERT ALFONSO Y MARTIZANO, appellants.
FACTS
On July 28, 1999, at around 1:15 a.m., a group of armed men entered the Sabungan Fastfood & Videoke in Caloocan City. Without provocation, they shot and killed five customers: Benjamin E. Valdez, Rodolfo O. Ortega, Augusto A. Billodo, Ruperto S. San Juan, and Renato T. Cleofas, Sr. The gunmen also robbed cash and personal belongings from other customers. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses, including waitresses Marie Flamiano, Eliza Bautista, and Rosalia Juanica, and security guard Jojo Paraiso, who identified the appellants as the perpetrators. Witnesses described specific acts, such as Alfredo Baracas firing the first shot, Diosdado Recepcion shooting Rodolfo Ortega while he was kneeling and pleading, and Robert Alfonso shooting Benjamin Valdez. After the shooting, the group commandeered a jeepney driven by Ruben Labjata, who later identified them. They were eventually apprehended in Tarlac. Separate Informations were filed for Multiple Murder, violation of P.D. No. 1866 (illegal possession of firearms), and Robbery in Band. During trial, Diosdado Recepcion died and Bernardo Ranara remained at large. The defense interposed alibi, claiming the accused were in Tarlac at the time of the incident.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt for the crimes of Multiple Murder, violation of P.D. No. 1866, and Robbery in Band.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. The positive identification by multiple eyewitnesses, who had no ill motive to testify falsely, prevailed over the weak defense of alibi. The witnesses provided clear and consistent accounts of the appellants’ participation in the shooting and robbery. The killing of the five victims constituted Murder, qualified by treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victims defenseless. The Court found conspiracy among the appellants, as their collective actions demonstrated a common purpose to kill and rob. The crime of Robbery in Band was also established. However, the Court modified the penalty for illegal possession of firearms. Applying the principle that the illegal possession of firearms is absorbed by the murder when the firearm is used to commit the homicide, the separate conviction for violation of P.D. No. 1866 was set aside. The appellants were found guilty of five counts of Murder and Robbery in Band.