G.R. No. 177751 ; December 14, 2011
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. FLORENCIO AGACER, EDDIE AGACER, ELYNOR AGACER, FRANKLIN AGACER and ERIC AGACER, Appellants.

FACTS

This is an appeal from the Court of Appeals Decision affirming the Regional Trial Court’s conviction of appellants for the murder of Cesario Agacer, their relative. An Information was filed charging appellants with Murder, committed on April 2, 1998, in Sta. Ana, Cagayan, alleging they conspired, armed with a long firearm, bow and arrow, bolo, and stones, and with evident premeditation and treachery, assaulted and shot Cesario Agacer, causing his death, aggravated by the use of an unlicensed firearm.
The prosecution’s version, based on witnesses Genesis Delantar and Roden Vallejo, was that on April 2, 1998, while Cesario was working on his ricefield, appellants emerged from a nearby banana plantation and surrounded him. Franklin set fire to Cesario’s rice seedlings. When Cesario returned to put out the fire, Franklin and Eric threw stones at him. Florencio and Eric then signaled Cesario to approach. When Cesario was about five meters away, Eddie suddenly pulled out a gun from a sack and shot Cesario in the chest. Simultaneously, Elynor shot an arrow but missed. Appellants then fled. An autopsy revealed eight gunshot entrance wounds, with the fatal wounds inflicted by a firearm capable of discharging several slugs simultaneously.
The defense, led by Florencio’s testimony, claimed self-defense and defense of relatives. Florencio asserted he went to the disputed ricefield, argued with Cesario, and later saw Cesario holding an object. He warned his co-appellants to flee. Cesario chased him. Florencio claimed he disarmed Cesario of a buckshot gun, after which Cesario drew another firearm and shot him. Florencio then fired the gun he had grabbed, hitting Cesario. He was helped by his nephews and later surrendered to police.
The RTC found appellants guilty of Murder qualified by treachery, sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, and ordered them to pay indemnities. The CA affirmed the RTC decision and added an award for moral damages.

ISSUE

1. Whether conspiracy existed among the appellants in the killing of Cesario Agacer.
2. Whether treachery attended the commission of the crime.
3. Whether the guilt of the appellants was proved beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the CA Decision with modifications to the awarded damages.
1. On Conspiracy: The Court found conspiracy was sufficiently established. Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. It may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated, or from the acts of the accused evincing a joint or common purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interest. The prosecution evidence showed appellants acted in concert: they arrived together, surrounded the victim, Franklin set the fire, Franklin and Eric threw stones, Florencio and Eric lured the victim closer, and Eddie executed the fatal shot while Elynor attempted to shoot with a bow and arrow. Their coordinated actions before, during, and after the shooting demonstrated a common criminal purpose.
2. On Treachery: The Court ruled treachery was present. Treachery (alevosia) exists when the offender employs means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. The attack was sudden and unexpected. Cesario was unarmed, tending to his farm, and was lured into a false sense of security when Florencio and Eric signaled him to approach. Eddie then shot him without any warning or opportunity to defend himself. The fact that an altercation (the stone-throwing) preceded the killing does not negate treachery, as the fatal attack by gunfire was still executed in a sudden and unexpected manner, ensuring the victim’s inability to retaliate.
3. On Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: The Court held that the prosecution proved appellants’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were clear, consistent, and credible. The Medico-Legal findings corroborated the violent nature of the attack. In contrast, the defense of self-defense was untenable. For self-defense to succeed, the accused must prove unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of sufficient provocation. Florencio’s claim failed as the number and location of the victim’s wounds (eight gunshot wounds, mostly on the chest) were inconsistent with a sudden, close-range encounter and indicated a determined effort to kill. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great weight.
Damages Award: The Court modified the damages in line with prevailing jurisprudence. Appellants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the heirs of Cesario Agacer: (1) Php75,000.00 as civil indemnity; (2) Php75,000.00 as moral damages; (3) Php30,000.00 as exemplary damages (due to the presence of treachery); and (4) Php40,000.00 as actual damages. All monetary awards shall earn legal interest at 6% per annum from the finality of the judgment until fully paid.