G.R. No. 116239 ; November 29, 2000
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ELPIDIO MERCADO y HERNANDO and AURELIO ACEBRON y ADORA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants, SPO2 Elpidio Mercado and SPO1 Aurelio Acebron, members of the PNP, were convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Pasig for the crime of Kidnapping with Murder and sentenced to death. The information alleged that on February 9, 1994, in Pasig, they kidnapped 17-year-old Richard Buama, brought him to Tanay, Rizal, subjected him to violence, and killed him. The prosecution’s case heavily relied on the eyewitness account of 12-year-old Florencio Villareal, who was also abducted. He testified that Mercado, suspecting them of theft, forcibly took him and Richard. They were driven to an apartment in Tanay where Richard was beaten, tied, gagged, and later placed in a car’s trunk by the appellants. Upon their return, Mercado declared Richard had been “silenced,” and Acebron was seen washing a bloodied bolo.

ISSUE

The core issue for automatic review is whether the guilt of the accused-appellants for the complex crime of Kidnapping with Murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court meticulously examined the testimony of the young eyewitness, Florencio Villareal, and found it credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human experience. His detailed account of the abduction, the conversation between the appellants about killing their victim, the brutal treatment, and the subsequent disposal of the body was corroborated by other evidence, including the recovery of Richard’s body and the appellants’ own admissions of being at the scene. The defense of denial and alibi was correctly rejected by the trial court for being weak and unsubstantiated, especially in the face of positive identification. The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy, as the acts of Mercado and Acebron—from the abduction to the implied agreement to kill—demonstrated a united purpose and community of design. The crime was correctly classified as Kidnapping with Murder under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 , as the kidnapping was perpetrated with the attendant circumstance of murder. The killing was not a separate crime but a necessary consequence of the appellants’ purpose to exact vengeance. The penalty of death was properly imposed, as the crime was committed with the qualifying circumstance that the victim was a minor and the aggravating circumstances of abuse of superior strength and evident premeditation were present. The award of damages was modified in line with prevailing jurisprudence.