G.R. No. 123853; August 25, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AGUSTIN AGPAWAN, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Agustin Agpawan, along with Bonifacio Chumacog and others, was charged with murder for the death of Christopher Batan. Only Agpawan was apprehended. The evidence showed that on February 23, 1993, the victim Batan, along with Mila Fana-ang and Fr. Eduardo Solang, were resting at a creek in Mountain Province when Agpawan’s group passed by. Later, as Batan’s group proceeded, they were stopped by Chumacog’s group. Shortly after, a volley of gunfire emanated from across the creek, hitting Batan. Fana-ang testified she saw Agpawan in a squatting position, aiming his rifle at them.
Agpawan admitted firing his rifle but claimed he did so only to warn Batan’s group of an impending attack by Chumacog, denying any intent to kill or conspire with the latter. The trial court rejected this defense, found conspiracy and treachery, convicted Agpawan of murder, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua with indemnity.

ISSUE

The core issues were whether conspiracy existed between Agpawan and Chumacog, and whether treachery qualified the killing to murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. Conspiracy was established not by direct proof of agreement but by the concerted and synchronized actions of the assailants, indicating a common criminal purpose. Agpawan fired the initial shots that hit Batan. Immediately after, Chumacog approached the fallen victim and shot him at close range. After ensuring Batan was dead, Agpawan signaled, and the group left together. This coordinated execution demonstrated a joint design. The Court found Agpawan’s claim of a warning shot implausible, as he could have fired into the air or verbally warned the victims without causing harm.
Treachery was also present. The attackers employed means to ensure the execution without risk to themselves. Chumacog’s group stopped the victims under a pretext, while Agpawan had already positioned himself in ambush across the creek. The victims were unarmed, unsuspecting, and placed in a defenseless position when suddenly fired upon. This method directly insured the attack’s success without any opportunity for defense. Consequently, the qualifying circumstance of treachery was properly appreciated, making the crime murder. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and civil indemnity were affirmed.