GR 137271; (August, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. No. 137271 ; August 15, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. REYNALDO CORRE JR., SONNY DE LOS REYES and ANGELES ARUJADO alias “KILIS,” accused, REYNALDO CORRE JR., appellant.
FACTS
On April 19, 1995, Primo Gatpandan, Jr., a fish trader, informed his neighbor Stanley Salazar that he had P35,000 to buy fish. Primo, together with his crew members Reynaldo Corre Jr. (appellant), Sonny de los Reyes, and Angeles Arujado, sailed on the motorized banca “John Nikko.” Primo was later reported missing. On April 25, 1995, his body was found in Sitio Pinamandayanan, San Ramon, Siruma, with a rope and anchor tied to his neck and his hands tied behind his back. The banca “John Nikko” was found abandoned in a different sitio. The P35,000 was missing. Witnesses placed appellant and his co-accused on board the banca on the afternoon of April 19, 1995. An autopsy concluded the cause of death was asphyxia by drowning, with traumatic injuries inflicted before submersion. Appellant, upon arrest, allegedly told the victim’s widow that they divided the money, receiving P8,000 as his share, and that the killing was masterminded by de los Reyes. Appellant denied the accusation, claiming he was at home cooking fish on the said date.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted appellant Reynaldo Corre Jr. of the crime of robbery with homicide based on circumstantial evidence.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The trial court’s reliance on circumstantial evidence was proper. The established circumstances—(1) the victim was last seen alive with appellant and his co-accused on the banca with a large sum of money; (2) the victim’s body was later found tied and drowned; (3) the banca was found abandoned with bloodstains; (4) the money was missing; (5) appellant and his co-accused were seen on the banca after the victim went missing; and (6) appellant admitted to dividing the missing money—formed an unbroken chain leading to the reasonable conclusion that appellant, in conspiracy with others, robbed and killed the victim. Appellant’s denial, being unsubstantiated and self-serving, could not prevail over the positive circumstantial evidence. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the awarded damages were affirmed.