G.R. No. 72975 . March 31, 1989.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JUANITO JUTIE, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Juanito Jutie, together with Pedro Aboy, was charged with murder for the killing of Elpidio Nepuscua on December 13, 1982, in Calasiao, Pangasinan. The information alleged conspiracy, evident premeditation, and treachery. Aboy was tried separately, convicted, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua, with his conviction becoming final. Jutie, arrested later, pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented eyewitness Roberto Joves, a 14-year-old boy, who testified that he saw Aboy and Jutie chasing the victim. Aboy caught up with Nepuscua, pointed a gun at him while the victim raised his hands and cried, and then shot him. Jutie subsequently fired at the victim with another firearm.
The autopsy conducted by Dr. Juan Zabala revealed seven gunshot wounds on the victim’s body. The doctor concluded that the wounds were inflicted by two different kinds of firearms based on their sizes and trajectories, corroborating the eyewitness account of two assailants firing weapons. The defense consisted mainly of denial, claiming Jutie was merely present and did not participate. The trial court convicted Jutie of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay indemnity jointly and severally with Aboy.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of Juanito Jutie for the crime of murder, particularly his participation in a conspiracy to kill the victim.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the civil liability. The Court found the evidence sufficient to establish Jutie’s guilt. The testimony of the young eyewitness, Roberto Joves, was deemed credible and consistent. The Court emphasized that the findings of the trial court on witness credibility are accorded great respect. The medical findings of Dr. Zabala provided strong corroboration, as the presence of gunshot wounds from two different firearms directly supported the prosecution’s narrative of two shooters, negating the possibility that Aboy acted alone.
The Court upheld the finding of conspiracy, inferring it from the concerted actions of Aboy and Jutie in chasing and simultaneously shooting the unarmed victim. Treachery was correctly appreciated because the victim was shot while his hands were raised in a plea for mercy, a stance that posed no risk to the attackers and ensured the execution of the attack without opportunity for defense. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed as the proper penalty for murder absent any modifying circumstances.
Regarding civil liability, the Court increased the actual damages to P30,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence. However, since Aboy’s separate conviction was already final, the modification applied only to Jutie. The Court ordered Jutie to pay the full P30,000.00 indemnity but with the right to demand contribution of P1,000.00 from his co-accused Aboy. The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment was modified accordingly.