GR 21604 6; (May, 1973) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-21604-5-6 May 25, 1973
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TOMAS LLAMERA, GERARDO LLAMERA, COLETO LLAMERA, and RUBENCIO LLORCA, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
The case arose from a land dispute between the Llamera family and the Degamo brothers. After the Degamos won a forcible entry case, they proceeded to plant on the contested riceland on December 9, 1962. Upon their return, prosecution witness Carmen Degamo Torillo, from her brother’s house, saw appellants Gerardo and Coleto Llamera at their house. As the Degamo brothers walked single file, a gunshot from Gerardo’s house felled Egenio. Two more successive shots from Coleto, who was seen holding a long gun at the window, struck Celso and Manuel. Appellants Tomas and Gerardo Llamera then descended armed with bolos and stabbed the fallen Celso and Egenio. Romualda Llamera hit Manuel with wood. Subsequently, Coleto and appellant Rubencio Llorca came down; Llorca was seen holding an object. Tomas and Gerardo later surrendered to the Chief of Police, admitting the killings and surrendering bolos. Coleto Llamera died pending appeal.
ISSUE
The primary issues were: (1) the criminal liability of appellants Tomas and Gerardo Llamera; (2) the liability of appellant Rubencio Llorca based on conspiracy; and (3) the presence of qualifying and aggravating circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s judgment. It upheld the murder convictions of Tomas and Gerardo Llamera, finding treachery present as the victims were shot suddenly and without warning while walking, then stabbed while prostrate. However, it eliminated the aggravating circumstance of cruelty, ruling the post-shooting stabbing was intended to ensure death and tamper with evidence, not to prolong suffering. The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender for Tomas and Gerardo was appreciated, resulting in the imposition of an indeterminate penalty for each murder. Regarding Rubencio Llorca, the Court acquitted him on reasonable doubt. The prosecution evidence failed to prove conspiracy convincingly; the mere sighting of him holding an unspecified object and leaving the scene after the killings, without proof of direct participation or prior agreement, was insufficient to establish conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Conspiracy requires proof as clear as the crime itself, which was lacking for Llorca. The case against the deceased Coleto Llamera was dismissed extinguished his criminal liability.