G.R. No. 122976 November 16, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. REGANDO VILLONEZ y PASCASIO, RUEL SANTOS y LAPADA, JOHN DOE, PETER DOE, ELMER DOE, and ROY DOE, accused, vs. EDUARDO N. SANTOS @ “EDDIE,” REYNALDO N. SANTOS @ “REY,” FERNANDO N. SANTOS @ “DEDE,” EMERLITO N. SANTOS @ “ELMER,” and RUDY N. SANTOS @ “BUDDA,” accused, REGANDO VILLONEZ y PASCASIO, EMERLITO N. SANTOS, and RUEL SANTOS, accused-Appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Regando Villonez, Ruel Santos, and Emerlito Santos were convicted of Murder by the Regional Trial Court of Malabon, Branch 170, in a Joint Decision dated November 23, 1995. Two separate Informations were filed for the killing of Gerardo Longasa on May 3, 1994, in Malabon, Metro Manila. The cases were consolidated for joint trial. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Edgar Jimenez, testified that he was informed of a fistfight between Longasa and a certain “Rudy.” While proceeding to mediate, he was attacked by a group of seven armed men, including the accused-appellants, on Javier II Street. He escaped and, while fleeing, saw Longasa being attacked. He witnessed Emerlito hitting Longasa with a piece of wood, while Regando and Ruel struck him with bottles. Rudy Santos and Eddie Santos then stabbed Longasa multiple times, while two others held his arms. The scene was illuminated by a fluorescent lamp. The autopsy conducted by Dr. Ronaldo Mendez revealed that Longasa died from stab wounds, and also had abrasions, contusions, and lacerated wounds. The defense of all accused-appellants was alibi and denial. Regando and his witness Arthur Aquino claimed they were together and only went to the scene after hearing about the killing. Ruel, who was 16 years old, claimed he was at his grandmother’s house and went to the scene out of curiosity after hearing screams. Emerlito claimed he was on his way to borrow money, heard his brother was in a fight, intervened, fought with Edgar Jimenez, and later heard his brother had stabbed someone. The trial court found the prosecution’s evidence credible and convicted the accused-appellants.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellants Regando Villonez, Emerlito Santos, and Ruel Santos of the crime of Murder based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction but MODIFIED the penalties. The Court found the testimony of eyewitness Edgar Jimenez to be credible, positive, and consistent. His account was corroborated by the medico-legal findings. The defense of alibi and denial cannot prevail over the positive identification by the eyewitness. The killing was attended by treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victim unable to defend himself. The Court also found conspiracy among the assailants, as their acts demonstrated a common purpose to kill Longasa. The penalty for Murder is reclusion perpetua to death. For Regando Villonez and Emerlito Santos, with no mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua. For Ruel Santos, who was a minor (16 years old) at the time of the commission of the crime, the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code applies. The penalty is reduced by one degree to reclusion temporal. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, he is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. All accused-appellants are ordered to pay the heirs of Gerardo Longasa P50,000 as death indemnity and P8,500 as actual damages.