G.R. No. 144598 ; February 6, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee vs. RANIL DUETES (at large), BASILIO QUIJADA @ “KOKOY,” (at large), REYMAN FONCARDAS & RITCHIE DEQUIÑA (at large), accused, REYMAN FONCARDAS, appellant.

FACTS

Appellant Reyman Foncardas, along with Ranil Duetes, Basilio Quijada, and Ritchie Dequiña, was charged with the murder of Napoleon Erno. The information alleged that on May 14, 1997, in Davao City, the accused, conspiring and helping one another, with treachery and evident premeditation, attacked and struck the victim with a piece of wood, causing his death. As Foncardas’s co-accused remained at large, only he was arraigned and pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution evidence established that after a drinking session, the group, including prosecution witness Marco Mariaca, was at a street corner. The victim was nearby. An argument ensued after Quijada demanded money from the victim. Duetes pulled the victim down, after which appellant and the others joined in beating him. Quijada then fetched a piece of wood. Appellant and Duetes held the victim, rendering him helpless, while Quijada struck his nape. The victim fell, and Quijada continued the assault. Garbage collectors witnessed the incident and shouted, causing the assailants, including appellant, to flee. The victim died from severe hemorrhage secondary to skull fractures.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved appellant’s guilt for the crime of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimonies of eyewitnesses Mariaca and garbage collector Quirino Cabag credible, consistent, and positive in identifying appellant as an active participant who held the victim to facilitate the fatal blow. Appellant’s denial, being inherently weak, could not prevail over this positive identification. The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy, as appellant’s acts of joining the initial mauling and then holding the victim demonstrated a community of criminal purpose with his co-accused to kill Napoleon Erno.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery was correctly appreciated. The attack was sudden and unexpected, and the act of holding the victim ensured he could not defend himself from the lethal blows with the piece of wood. However, the Court modified the penalty. While the crime is murder punishable by reclusion perpetua to death, the absence of any aggravating or mitigating circumstance mandates the imposition of the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua pursuant to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code. The award of damages was also increased in line with prevailing jurisprudence.