G.R. No. 110813. June 28, 2001.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ERNESTO PARDUA, ROGELIO PARDUA, GEORGE PARDUA, and WARLITO PARDUA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The case is an appeal from the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Isabela, Roxas, Branch 23, convicting accused Ernesto Pardua, Rogelio Pardua, George Pardua, and Warlito Pardua of murder and sentencing each to reclusion perpetua with damages. Only Ernesto Pardua was initially charged. After two prosecution witnesses testified, an amended information was admitted to include Rogelio, Warlito, George, and Robert Dela Cruz (at large). All accused pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution evidence established that on November 9, 1989, at about 8:00 a.m., Toribio Simpliciano and his farmhands were plowing a rice field in Rang-ayan, Roxas, Isabela. The five accused arrived on a trailer drawn by a “kuliglig.” They jumped off and attacked Toribio. Rogelio hacked him with a “Tabas” (long bolo) on the neck and hips. Warlito hit him with a piece of wood (“dos por dos”) as he fell. George and Robert Dela Cruz also hit the fallen victim with their bolos. Ernesto, armed with a shotgun (“quebrang”), mauled the victim and pointed the gun at Toribio’s companions to prevent rescue. The assailants then fled. Toribio was rushed to the hospital but died. Dr. Conrado L. Gabriel’s post-mortem report indicated the cause of death was massive hemorrhage with skull fracture, with wounds including a deep neck wound almost separating the head.
Leonora Simpliciano, the victim’s widow, testified that earlier that morning, she overheard Atty. Bugarin (who resented his ejectment from a house owned by the victim’s daughter) talking with the accused in Danny Jose’s house, telling them he would be responsible if they killed Toribio. She saw Danny Jose hand a firearm to Rogelio.
Accused Ernesto Pardua invoked self-defense, claiming he was an agricultural lessee and that Toribio, armed with an air rifle, fired at him, hitting his right arm, prompting him to grab the gun and hack Toribio with his bolo. Rogelio and George denied participation, claiming they were working in their own fields and only heard shouting; Rogelio claimed he hailed the tricycle that took Toribio to the hospital. Warlito did not take the witness stand.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellants of murder, particularly in assessing the credibility of prosecution witnesses and finding conspiracy.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction with MODIFICATION. The trial court’s findings on credibility are accorded great weight, as it is in the best position to observe witness demeanor. The testimonies of prosecution witnesses Orlando Simpliciano and Alfredo Villanueva were candid, straightforward, and consistent, detailing a broad daylight attack in an open field. The defense of self-defense by Ernesto Pardua fails because unlawful aggression by the victim was not established; his claim of being shot was uncorroborated and the nature of the victim’s multiple wounds indicated a determined assault, not an act of defense. The court found conspiracy among the accused, as their simultaneous and coordinated attack demonstrated a common purpose to kill. The crime was murder qualified by treachery (alevosia), as the attack was sudden and unexpected, giving the victim no chance to defend himself. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each appellant was affirmed. The award of damages was modified: accused-appellants were ordered to pay jointly and severally the heirs of Toribio Simpliciano P30,000.00 as actual damages, P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, plus costs.