G.R. No. 95355 February 24, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDUARDO “EDDIE” ROBEDILLO, ARTEMIO “ARTEM” YEPES, ARTEMIO “ARTEM” NOVIO, and ANACLETO “YONTONG” NOVIO, accused, EDUARDO “EDDIE” ROBEDILLO, ARTEMIO, “ARTEM” YEPES, and ANACLETO “YONTONG” NOVIO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On May 30, 1988, in Tolosa, Leyte, Martiano Cinco and his son Sammy were invited to a party at the house of Felicisimo Novio, where the four accused were also present. After eating, Sammy waited outside and saw his father jump from the balcony, bleeding and pursued by all four accused, who were armed with bolos. The accused caught Martiano in a nearby ricefield. Sammy, hiding nearby, saw his father kneeling with hands raised, pleading for mercy while surrounded. Artemio and Anacleto Novio assaulted from the front, Eduardo Robedillo hacked from the right, and Artemio Yepes stabbed from behind. They took turns striking Martiano until he fell. Eufrocina Cinco, the victim’s common-law wife, witnessed the attack from about 80 meters away, seeing the four armed men surround and hack her kneeling husband. She testified that Robedillo continued attacking after the others left and shouted, “Who else is aggrieved?” The post-mortem examination revealed Martiano suffered 11 wounds, and the cause of death was hypovolemic shock from multiple stab wounds. Accused Artemio Yepes claimed alibi, while Anacleto Novio denied participation, claiming he tried to stop the chase. Eduardo Robedillo did not testify. The Regional Trial Court convicted Robedillo, Yepes, and Anacleto Novio of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, with civil indemnity of P30,000. During appeal, Artemio Yepes was reported to have died in September 1989, and Anacleto Novio jumped bail and remained at large.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellants of murder instead of the lesser offense of homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the murder conviction. The appeal of Anacleto Novio was dismissed due to his flight, and the appeal of Artemio Yepes was dismissed due to his death. The Court held that the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength was properly appreciated. Contrary to the accused-appellant’s reliance on People v. Narciso, the evidence clearly showed conspiracy among the accused to kill the victim. Their collective action—surrounding the kneeling victim, blocking his escape, and alternately striking him with bolos—demonstrated they took advantage of their numerical superiority. Conspiracy does not require a prior plan; it is sufficient that at the time of the aggression, all accused manifested a common intent to attack. The positive identification by two eyewitnesses and the nature and number of the victim’s wounds substantiated the conspiracy and the use of superior strength. The trial court’s decision was affirmed with the modification that the civil indemnity was increased from P30,000 to P50,000. The trial court was directed to order the arrest of Anacleto Novio and the forfeiture of his bail bond, and the commitment of Eduardo Robedillo to the Bureau of Corrections.