G.R. No. 132329 December 17, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CONSTANCIO MERINO and ARNULFO SIERVO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The accused-appellants, Constancio Merino and Arnulfo Siervo, were convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City for the crime of robbery with rape. The prosecution established that on the evening of February 13, 1993, appellants, along with several other armed men, forcibly entered the residence of the Pagaduan family in Quezon City. The intruders hogtied the family members, ransacked the house, and stole valuables. During the robbery, Siervo brought the victim Jehan Pagaduan to a bedroom and raped her at knifepoint. Subsequently, Merino entered the room and also raped Jehan. Another victim, Jacqueline Pagaduan, was similarly raped by one of the other assailants. The trial court found the testimonies of the victims credible and sentenced both appellants to reclusion perpetua.
The appellants raised their conviction on appeal, challenging the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. They argued that the identification was unreliable and that their defenses of alibi and denial should prevail. They also contested the trial court’s appreciation of nocturnity as an aggravating circumstance, arguing that the nighttime was not deliberately sought to facilitate the crime.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the prosecution witnesses’ identification of the appellants; (2) whether conspiracy was sufficiently proven; and (3) whether nocturnity was correctly appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On the first issue, the Court reiterated the well-settled principle that the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded the highest respect on appeal, as it had the direct opportunity to observe the witnesses’ demeanor. The positive identification of the appellants by the victims, who had a clear view of their faces as the intruders did not initially conceal them, was found credible and sufficient to establish their participation. The defenses of alibi and denial could not overcome this positive identification.
On the second issue, the Court found conspiracy evident from the appellants’ collective and coordinated actions. The armed group acted in concert to subdue the family, steal property, and commit rape. The act of one in furtherance of the common criminal design was deemed the act of all, making both appellants equally liable for the rape committed by each, even though Merino was not the initial perpetrator against Jehan.
Regarding the third issue, the Court modified the trial court’s ruling on nocturnity. While the crime occurred at night, the prosecution failed to prove that the appellants deliberately sought or took advantage of the darkness to facilitate the commission of the offense or to prevent recognition. Nocturnity is not aggravating unless specifically sought for such purposes; its mere occurrence is insufficient. Consequently, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was upheld but without the erroneous aggravating circumstance. The civil indemnity and damages awarded by the trial court were also affirmed.