GR 233088; (January, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. 233088. January 16, 2023.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ROGELIO MENDOZA Y SAMSON, HECTOR CORNISTA Y REOTUTAR, ALVIN LABRA Y CORNISTA, BRIAN HO Y BARBOSA, RICARDO BANAAY Y SINANGOTE, JOEL DIONALDO Y ATINTA, ISIDRO INOSANTO Y ARGUELLES, FREEMAN BAGARES Y ROBERTO, RICARDO ABALOS Y MANUSO, ROMEO RAYGA Y BANCO, ANTONIO BATUCAN Y ABANILLA, GARY BATAN, PEDRO SORIMA, ELORDE BITANGHOL, AND ANDY QUINTANA, ACCUSED, HECTOR CORNISTA Y REOTUTAR, ALVIN LABRA Y CORNISTA, BRIAN HO Y BARBOSA, RICARDO BANAAY Y SINANGOTE, JOEL DIONALDO Y ATINTA, ISIDRO INOSANTO Y ARGUELLES, FREEMAN BAGARES Y ROBERTO, RICARDO ABALOS Y MANUSO, ROMEO RAYGA Y BANCO AND ANTONIO BATUCAN Y ABANILLA, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS.
FACTS
Accused-appellants were charged with Kidnapping for Ransom for the abduction of Carrie Choa on June 28, 2005, in Imus, Cavite. The kidnappers demanded Twenty Million Pesos, and the victim’s sister, Gliceree Continting, paid P515,700.00 for her release. Rogelio Mendoza was discharged as a state witness. He testified that he and his co-accused were members of the “Waray-Waray Kidnap for Ransom” group. He participated as a cook and guard, witnessing the planning and the detention of Carrie in a nipa hut in Antipolo for four days. The victim, Carrie Choa, identified several accused-appellants as her abductors and detailed her kidnapping from her orchid farm, her transportation while blindfolded, her detention, and the ransom demand. Her testimony was corroborated by her companion, Lourdes Torralba, and her sister, Gliceree. The accused-appellants denied involvement, interposing alibis of being elsewhere during the incident. The Regional Trial Court found them guilty as principals of Kidnapping for Ransom and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, ordering them to pay damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modifications to the damages awarded.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellants for the crime of Kidnapping for Ransom.
RULING
Yes, the Court of Appeals’ decision is affirmed. The Supreme Court held that all elements of Kidnapping for Ransom were proven: (1) the victim was deprived of liberty; (2) the deprivation was illegal; and (3) the kidnapping was for the purpose of extorting ransom. The positive identification of the accused-appellants by the victim, Carrie Choa, and the state witness, Rogelio Mendoza, was given greater weight than the unsubstantiated defenses of denial and alibi. The collective acts of the accused before, during, and after the kidnapping established conspiracy. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was properly imposed in lieu of the death penalty under Republic Act No. 9346. The awards of actual damages (P515,700.00 as ransom), civil indemnity (P100,000.00), moral damages (P100,000.00), and exemplary damages (P100,000.00) were sustained, with interest at 6% per annum from finality until fully paid.