G.R. No. 102045 . March 17, 1993.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LUZ CARPIO VDA. DE QUIJANO, AND GERRY CAÑETE y VILLAS, accused-appellants.

FACTS

An amended information charged accused-appellants Luz Carpio Vda. de Quijano (the victim’s wife) and Gerry Cañete with parricide, alleging conspiracy, treachery, and evident premeditation in the killing of Renato Quijano on April 23, 1990, in Kalookan City. Both pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s evidence, as summarized by the Solicitor General, established the following: Two days before the incident, the victim confided to his sister that his wife and Cañete were having an illicit relationship. The day before the killing, appellants were seen holding hands at Luneta Park. At about 12:30 a.m. on April 23, 1990, Cañete and an unidentified male companion arrived at the victim’s house; Luz Carpio opened the door and let them in. Around 1:30 a.m., barangay tanods heard banging sounds from the house. A neighbor, Ricky Jelly, later saw Cañete emerge from the house holding a knife, accompanied by a male companion, and walk hurriedly away. The tanods found the victim dead inside with multiple stab wounds. Cañete could not be found afterward until he was caught visiting Luz Carpio’s store 25 days later. The trial court convicted Luz Carpio of parricide and Gerry Cañete of murder, both sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The primary issues, as framed by the assigned errors, include: (1) whether conspiracy between the accused was proven beyond reasonable doubt; (2) whether treachery attended the commission of the crime; (3) the credibility of prosecution witnesses; (4) the propriety of admitting the testimony of the son, Richard Quijano; and (5) whether the conviction of both accused was proper.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision.
1. On Conspiracy: The Court found that conspiracy was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The mere meeting at Luneta Park did not prove a prearranged agreement, and Luz Carpio’s act of opening the door late at night, while suspicious, was insufficient to establish a common criminal design. Conspiracy must be proved with the same degree of certainty as the crime itself.
2. On the Conviction of Luz Carpio: Due to the lack of proof of conspiracy, and absent any direct or circumstantial evidence positively showing her participation in the killing, Luz Carpio was entitled to the presumption of innocence. The decision convicting her was reversed, and she was acquitted.
3. On the Conviction of Gerry Cañete: The evidence against him was circumstantial but sufficient to sustain a conviction. The circumstances—his illicit relationship with the victim’s wife (motive), his entry into the house with a companion late at night, the sounds of violence, his immediate departure from the house holding a knife, his flight and subsequent hiding—formed an unbroken chain leading to the fair and reasonable conclusion that he was the author of the crime, to the exclusion of all others.
4. On the Qualifying Circumstance: The Court found no evidence that the killing was committed with treachery or evident premeditation. Thus, the crime committed by Cañete was Homicide, not Murder.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
Accused Gerry Cañete was found guilty of Homicide and sentenced under the Indeterminate Sentence Law to an imprisonment term of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum, to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum, and to pay indemnity of P50,000.00 to the victim’s heirs. Accused Luz Carpio Vda. de Quijano was ACQUITTED and ordered released.