THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 235929. March 14, 2018.]
CIPRIANO LARA, petitioner,vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedMarch 14, 2018, which reads as follows: cDHAES
"G.R. No. 235929 (Cipriano Lara vs. People of the Philippines). — Considering the allegations, issues and arguments presented, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in its assailed Decision dated July 28, 2016 1 as to warrant the exercise of the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
In this appeal, petitioner Cipriano Lara questions the credibility of the witnesses by whose testimonies the factual antecedents relied upon by the trial court for his conviction were established.
It is an oft-repeated principle, however, that the credibility of witnesses is best left to the determination by the trial courts. As such, the finding of the Regional Trial Court that was affirmed by the CA in this case, that the witnesses of the prosecution were credible, is binding on this Court.
Next, petitioner questions the finding of the lower courts that the crime was attended by conspiracy, alleging that "the prosecution failed to present any direct proof that petitioner and accused Desiderio conspired to kill complainant."
Such contention is misplaced.
In People v. Las Piñas, 2 the Court categorically stated:
Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code states that "conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it." It does not need to be proven by direct evidence and may be inferred from the conduct — before, during, and after the commission of the crime — indicative of a joint purpose, concerted action, and concurrence of sentiments as in conspiracy. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.
Thus, contrary to the contention of petitioner, direct evidence of a previous agreement to commit the crime is not necessary to prove conspiracy.
Verily, the instant appeal must fail.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Decision dated July 28, 2016 of the Court of Appeals, Cebu City, in CA-G.R. CR No. 02204 is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Pablito A. Perez, concurred in by Associate Justices Pamela Ann Abella Maxino (Chairperson, 20th Division, CA Cebu City) and Gabriel T. Robeniol, rollo, pp. 29-42.
2. G.R. No. 191723, July 23, 2014.