G.R. No. L-100938-39 December 15, 1993
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Blademir Devaras, Pablo Devaras and Ronilo Caisek, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On July 10, 1990, at about 11:00 PM, appellants Blademir Devaras, Pablo Devaras, and Ronilo Caisek, along with prosecution witness Raul Animos, were on a “bantay-bayan” patrol. While at the Daguitan bridge, they saw a pedicab approaching. Without provocation, Blademir Devaras, armed with a “sansibar” (long bolo), suddenly attacked and hacked the pedicab driver, Efren Verzosa. Simultaneously, Ronilo Caisek, also armed with a long bolo, attacked the passenger, Felix Verzosa. Both victims were killed. Pablo Devaras did not participate in the killings but later helped Blademir throw Efren’s body over the bridge into the river. Ronilo Caisek, under threat of death, helped throw Felix’s body over the bridge. The abandoned pedicab was reported, leading to an investigation. Police noticed blood on Raul Animos’s shirt, took him into custody, and he revealed the incident, implicating the three appellants. The bodies were recovered the next day; autopsy showed Efren sustained nine wounds and Felix sustained twenty wounds. At trial, all accused denied participation, but their alibis were found inconsistent and incredible by the trial court.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellants of murder instead of homicide.
2. Whether the trial court erred in not holding that Ruel Animos should also have been charged and convicted as an accessory like appellant Pablo Devaras.

RULING

1. The trial court correctly convicted appellants of murder. The evidence established that Blademir Devaras and Ronilo Caisek suddenly attacked their unarmed victims with bolos, ensuring the commission of the offense without risk to themselves from any defense the victims might make. This circumstance of alevosia (treachery) qualified the killings to murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. The court found no conspiracy, thus Blademir was correctly held guilty only for the murder of Efren Verzosa, and Ronilo only for the murder of Felix Verzosa.
2. The trial court did not err. The determination of who to prosecute rests primarily with the prosecutor, who has quasi-judicial discretion. The extraordinary writ of mandamus to compel inclusion of a co-accused is available only if the petitioner exhausts all ordinary remedies, such as filing a motion with the trial court for the indictment of the excluded person. No such motion was filed by the appellants in this case.
The court affirmed the penalties with modification: Blademir Devaras and Ronilo Caisek were each sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay civil indemnity of P50,000.00 to the heirs of their respective victims. Pablo Devaras, as an accessory (for helping dispose of Efren’s body), was sentenced under the Indeterminate Sentence Law to four years and two months of prision correccional as minimum, to eight years of prision mayor as maximum. Regarding civil liability for Efren Verzosa’s heirs, Blademir Devaras (principal) was ordered to pay P40,000.00 and Pablo Devaras (accessory) P10,000.00, with each being subsidiarily liable for the other’s share in case of insolvency, pursuant to Articles 109 and 110 of the Revised Penal Code.