GR L 45382; (May, 1985) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-45382 May 13, 1985
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NICOLAS SERRANO, et al., accused, NICOLAS SERRANO, alias Kolas, and TELESFORO ABELLADA, alias Porong, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
The accused, including appellants Nicolas Serrano and Telesforo Abellada, were charged with murder for the killing of Emilio Sualibio. Serrano, a barrio captain and hacienda overseer, resented the victim after the hacienda owner transferred control of a warehouse key to Sualibio. On the evening of September 4, 1972, Serrano revealed his plan to kill Sualibio to Abellada and others at his house. The plan was finalized in the early morning of September 5 at Abellada’s own house. Later that morning, the group, using Serrano’s motorboat, located Sualibio fishing at sea. Rolando Aguila and Penion Armamento jumped into the water and stabbed the victim to death. The group then retrieved the body, transported it, and dumped it in another location.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether appellant Telesforo Abellada’s defense of duress or uncontrollable fear is valid to exculpate him from criminal liability for the murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court rejected Abellada’s defense of duress and affirmed his conviction. The legal logic is that for duress to be a valid defense, the threat must be present, imminent, and of such a nature as to induce a well-grounded apprehension of death or serious bodily harm, reducing the accused to a mere instrument who acts against his will. The Court found that the alleged threat made by Rolando Aguila against Abellada hours before the crime was consummated did not constitute such an irresistible force. Crucially, Abellada had multiple opportunities to escape—while walking to the riverbank and before the boat departed—but he voluntarily stayed and cooperated. His active participation was evident: he attended the planning meetings at Serrano’s and his own house, proceeded with the group to the crime scene, and after the stabbing, helped lift the victim’s body into the boat and later dump it. This conduct demonstrated a preconceived plan and concerted action, establishing conspiracy. As a co-conspirator, Abellada is equally liable for the murder committed by his cohorts, notwithstanding that he did not inflict the fatal wounds. The decision was affirmed with modification, increasing the civil indemnity to P30,000.