G.R. No. 117970 July 28, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ULYSSES M. CAWALING, ERNESTO TUMBAGAHAN, RICARDO DE LOS SANTOS, and HILARIO CAJILO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On December 4, 1982, around 9:00 PM, Ronie Ilisan was killed in the ricefield of Poblacion, San Jose, Romblon. The prosecution’s version, based on the testimony of Vicente Ilisan (the victim’s brother), is that after he and Ronie were drinking at the C & J-4 Kitchenette, they were warned that the accused were waiting outside. Upon leaving, they were flashlighted by a group consisting of Mayor Ulysses M. Cawaling, policemen Ernesto Tumbagahan, Ricardo De los Santos, Hilario Cajilo, Andres Fontamillas, and civilian Alex Batuigas. The brothers ran. Vicente saw Ronie fall in the ricefield, kneel with raised hands, and then be approached and shot by all six accused. Mayor Cawaling then stated, “you left him, he is already dead.” The victim died from multiple gunshot wounds. Prior to the criminal case, an administrative proceeding before the National Police Commission resulted in the dismissal from service of Tumbagahan, De los Santos, Cajilo, and Fontamillas. An Information for murder was subsequently filed against all appellants and Fontamillas. The trial court convicted all accused, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder. The decision also addresses jurisdictional and evidentiary doctrines, including: (1) whether the Regional Trial Court, not the Sandiganbayan, had jurisdiction; (2) the credibility of witness testimonies; (3) the applicability of the equipoise rule; (4) the defense of alibi; and (5) the existence of conspiracy.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The RTC had jurisdiction over the murder case involving a town mayor, as the Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction was not exclusive under the applicable laws. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility was upheld, finding the testimony of eyewitness Vicente Ilisan credible and consistent. The equipoise rule was inapplicable as the prosecution’s evidence was overwhelming. The defense of alibi proffered by appellants Tumbagahan and Cajilo was rejected because it was weak and could not prevail over positive identification. Conspiracy among all appellants was established through circumstantial evidence, demonstrating a community of criminal purpose. The killing was qualified by treachery, as the attack was sudden and rendered the victim defenseless. The Court modified the damages awarded, increasing the civil indemnity to P50,000.00 and awarding moral damages, but found the evidence for lost earnings insufficient. The appealed Decision was affirmed with modifications to the civil liability.