G.R. No. 178233 / G.R. No. 180510; December 4, 2008
Joseph A. Gandol, plaintiff-appellee, vs. People of the Philippines, accused-appellant. / People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Eduardo Gandol y Albor, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Joseph A. Gandol and Eduardo A. Gandol, along with Nestor Ocaña, were charged with Murder for the killing of Ricardo Asejo, Jr. on June 1, 1997, in Legazpi City. The Amended Information alleged conspiracy, treachery, and abuse of superior strength. During arraignment, all accused pleaded not guilty. Nestor Ocaña was later discharged to become a state witness. The prosecution evidence, primarily from Nestor, established that on the evening of June 1, 1997, Eduardo, Joseph, Nestor, and the victim Ricardo were drinking gin at Joseph’s house. Joseph, armed with a knife, called Ricardo outside, where he stabbed Ricardo twice at the back. Eduardo, also armed, followed and stabbed Ricardo several times in the chest. After Ricardo fell, Eduardo inflicted more stab wounds. Eduardo then threatened Nestor and forced him to help drag Ricardo’s body to a nearby brook. Eduardo later burned Nestor’s hand with a heated knife to silence him. The autopsy by Dr. Modesto Kapuno revealed ten stab wounds and concluded the cause of death was asphyxia by drowning, with a contributory condition of cardiac tamponade from a stab wound to the heart. Both accused denied the charge and pointed at each other as the perpetrator. The Regional Trial Court found both guilty of Murder. It sentenced Eduardo to reclusion perpetua, considering his voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance offsetting the aggravating circumstance of relationship (the victim was his brother-in-law). It sentenced Joseph to death, finding the murder aggravated by relationship. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions but modified Joseph’s penalty to reclusion perpetua and adjusted the awarded damages.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the convictions of Joseph Gandol and Eduardo Gandol for the crime of Murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petitions and affirmed the Decision of the Court of Appeals with modifications. The Court held that the prosecution proved the guilt of both accused beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of state witness Nestor Ocaña was found credible, consistent, and corroborated by physical evidence. The Court upheld the presence of treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victim unable to defend himself. The aggravating circumstance of relationship was also established, as the victim was a brother-in-law of both accused. For Eduardo, the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was properly appreciated, offsetting relationship and resulting in the penalty of reclusion perpetua. For Joseph, the penalty was also reclusion perpetua, as the death penalty could not be imposed following the ruling in People v. Mateo. The Court modified the awarded damages, ordering the accused to pay solidarily the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages.