G.R. No. 104527 October 7, 1994
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Rey Cruza y Bauio, Joemarie Palmarez y Pagdatu, Jimmy Palmarez y Pagdatu and Garry Padre-e y Pallore, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On July 10, 1991, at Barangay Mapulang Lupa, Valenzuela, Metro Manila, Arnold Fuentes drove his truck into and damaged the gate of a lot owned by Canuto Natividad, leading to an argument. Fuentes left but returned minutes later with accused-appellants Rey Cruza, Joemarie Palmarez, Jimmy Palmarez, and Garry Padre-e (along with Roy Cruza, who remained at large). The five approached Canuto from behind and started mauling him. Fuentes attempted to stab him twice but missed. The four companions then held Canuto’s arms, rendering him defenseless, enabling Fuentes to successfully stab him in the abdomen. Rey Cruza was heard saying, “Pare, saksakin mo na!” and later Roy Cruza exclaimed, “Pare, takbo na, napuruhan mo na!” The group fled, but Fuentes was overtaken and killed by townspeople; Canuto died that same night. The four accused-appellants were later found hiding under a bulldozer in the JPL trucking compound where they worked. After investigation, an information was filed against them. Prior to arraignment, the prosecution moved for reinvestigation; State Prosecutor Rafael Señora recommended dropping charges against the Palmarez brothers for lack of evidence, and Second Assistant City Prosecutor Bayani M. Jamias moved for dismissal against all accused, citing no showing of conspiracy. Judge Teresita Capulong denied the motion and proceeded to trial. The prosecution presented three eyewitnesses (Teodulo Natividad, Rosauro Arsala, and Tony Go) who consistently identified the accused-appellants as participants. The defense claimed they were merely 10 meters away, having been asked by Fuentes to help push his stalled truck, and fled out of fear of implication after witnessing the stabbing. The trial court convicted all accused as conspirators in the murder, sentencing each to reclusion perpetua, solidary civil indemnity of P50,000.00, and costs. Joemarie Palmarez, Jimmy Palmarez, and Garry Padre-e appealed on time; Rey Cruza’s belated appeal was not entertained.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellants actively participated in the killing of Canuto Natividad as conspirators, thereby making them equally liable for the crime of murder.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, holding that the accused-appellants were conspirators in the murder of Canuto Natividad. The Court deferred to the trial court’s factual findings and credibility assessments, noting the prosecution witnesses’ positive identification of the accused-appellants as those who mauled and restrained the victim to facilitate the fatal stabbing by Fuentes. Their collective actions—approaching together, holding the victim’s arms, encouraging the stabbing, and fleeing together—demonstrated concerted effort and conspiracy. The defense’s claim of being mere distant spectators was implausible given their unexplained flight and hiding. Minor discrepancies in witness testimonies did not impair their credibility. The crime was qualified by treachery (alevosia), as the attack was sudden and from behind, depriving the victim of any chance to defend himself. The trial court correctly denied the prosecution’s motions for dismissal, as once jurisdiction is acquired, any subsequent disposition by prosecutors requires court approval. The accused-appellants’ liability is not negated by the fact that only Fuentes inflicted the fatal wound or that their initial intent might have been only to maul; under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code, a person is responsible for all consequences of their unlawful act. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and civil liabilities were upheld. The appeal was dismissed.