G.R. No. 94528 March 1, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PETER CADEVIDA and ROMEO DIDAL, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Peter Cadevida and Romeo Didal were charged with robbery with homicide before the Regional Trial Court of Dumaguete City. The information alleged that on the evening of February 3, 1985, in Sitio Diay, Barangay Dahili, Mabinay, Negros Oriental, they conspired to kill Sopriano Yuson and rob him of Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Pesos (P10,700.00). The trial court found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua, indemnity, restitution, and costs. The facts established were: 1) On February 3, 1985, the victim left his home with P10,000.00; 2) That evening, appellants and the victim were seen drinking tuba together at a store; 3) On February 4, 1985, the victim’s headless body with multiple stab wounds was found, and the money was missing; 4) Appellants were unusually absent from the PC Detachment where they usually stayed during the time of the crime; and 5) Appellants voluntarily led PC soldiers and civilians to the spot along the Diay River where they dug up the victim’s buried head. Appellants denied the charges, claiming alibi and asserting they were forced to pose with the victim’s head.

ISSUE

Whether the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to convict the accused-appellants of the crime charged.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the decision of the trial court. The circumstantial evidence was sufficient to establish appellants’ guilt for homicide but not for robbery with homicide. The Court found the combination of proven circumstances—the victim last seen with appellants, their unexplained absence, and their exclusive knowledge of the location of the victim’s buried head—produced a conviction beyond reasonable doubt for the killing. However, the evidence for the robbery component was insufficient. The testimony regarding the money was hearsay, as the person who allegedly gave the victim the money (Alberto Yuson) did not testify to that fact on the witness stand, and the money was never recovered. Consequently, the appellants were found guilty only of homicide. The penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence of 6 years and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal. The indemnity was increased to P50,000.00, and the order for restitution was deleted. The alleged aggravating circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place, and ignominy were not proven.