GR 175332; (February, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 175332 ; February 6, 2008
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. DAMASO GANDIA y CASTRO, JERRY RAMIREZ y RECIO, RENATO OLLERES y RIVERA, DANTE GANDIA y SANTOS, JOEL GONZALES y TODIO and ERNESTO CALARIPIO y MORALES (Acquitted), appellants.
FACTS
On June 28, 1993, at a drinking spree in Siniloan, Laguna, a dispute arose between the group of victim Louie Albuero and the pub owner, appellant Damaso Gandia. After Albuero’s group left the pub, empty bottles were thrown at them. Albuero and a companion returned, and Albuero boxed Damaso. Damaso then instructed his men to chase Albuero, retrieved a gun, and fired it. The victim fled but was caught, stumbled, and fell prone. Appellants Joel Gonzales, Dante Gandia, Jerry Ramirez, and Renato Olleres then stabbed him multiple times, resulting in his death. Appellants were charged with Murder qualified by treachery, evident premeditation, and abuse of superior strength.
The Regional Trial Court convicted all six accused of Murder, qualified by treachery, and sentenced them to Reclusion Perpetua, except for minor Ernesto Calaripio who received a lesser sentence. Damaso Gandia, Dante Gandia, and Jerry Ramirez subsequently withdrew their appeals. The case, as to the remaining appellants Olleres and Gonzales (and Calaripio), was referred to the Court of Appeals pursuant to People v. Mateo. The CA affirmed the conviction of the five but acquitted Calaripio for reasonable doubt and awarded exemplary damages. Only Olleres and Gonzales appealed to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of appellants Renato Olleres and Joel Gonzales for the crime of Murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the appellants’ conviction for Murder. The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy among the accused. The act of Damaso Gandia in ordering his men to chase the victim and firing a gun, coupled with the simultaneous stabbing by Gonzales, Dante, Ramirez, and Olleres while the victim was prone and helpless, demonstrated a community of criminal purpose. Conspiracy having been established, the act of one is the act of all.
The Court also ruled that treachery was correctly appreciated to qualify the killing as Murder. The attack was sudden and executed in a manner that deprived the victim of any chance to defend himself. The victim, while fleeing, was chased, caused to stumble, and then stabbed repeatedly by multiple assailants while he was in a prone position. This method of attack ensured the execution of the crime without risk to the appellants arising from any defense the victim might make. The Court further held that the retroactive application of the 2000 Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, which requires specific averments on circumstances, was not warranted as it would be prejudicial to the appellee, and the Information sufficiently alleged the qualifying circumstance of treachery. The award of exemplary damages by the CA was also sustained.