GR 118624; (October, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 118624. October 8, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAMON ORTIZ, ANTONIO ORTIZ and MARIONITO DEL ROSARIO, accused-appellants.
FACTS
On October 27, 1985, during a family reunion in Cabanatuan City, stones were thrown at the house of Lauro Santos. Lauro went outside and shouted a challenge. He was suddenly met by Pat. Benjamin Mendoza (armed with an armalite) and the three appellants. Appellants Marionito del Rosario and Antonio Ortiz held Lauro and dragged him towards the barangay hall while appellant Ramon Ortiz fired his armalite towards the ground to prevent others from helping. Bursts of gunfire were later heard from the direction of the barangay hall. Lauro’s body was later found there with multiple gunshot wounds to the head, causing his death. Pat. Mendoza died prior to the institution of the case. Appellants were charged with murder, convicted by the trial court, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. They appealed, contending the trial court erred in convicting based on circumstantial evidence, appreciating qualifying/aggravating circumstances, finding conspiracy, and rejecting their alibi.
ISSUE
Whether the conviction of the appellants based on circumstantial evidence, and the findings of conspiracy and the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, are proper.
RULING
Yes. The conviction based on circumstantial evidence is proper. The circumstances proven—(1) appellants suddenly emerged after the victim’s challenge; (2) two appellants held and dragged the victim; (3) appellants fired rifles to dissuade aid; (4) gunfire was heard from the direction they took the victim; and (5) the victim’s body was found there with fatal rifle wounds—form an unbroken chain leading to the reasonable conclusion that appellants are the perpetrators. Conspiracy was proven by their concerted actions in dragging the victim and firing weapons, showing a common purpose. The killing was qualified to murder by abuse of superior strength, given the blatant inequality of strength between the victim and his four armed aggressors. The circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, and nighttime were not sufficiently proven. The defenses of denial and alibi were correctly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of damages are affirmed.