People v. Cerilo y Fuentes

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 243013. July 7, 2021.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.REY CERILO y FUENTES, accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedJuly 7, 2021, which reads as follows: HTcADC

"G.R. No. 243013 (People of the Philippines v. Rey Cerilo y Fuentes). — On appeal 1 is the July 6, 2018 Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09602, which affirmed with modifications the Decision 3 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 15 of Manila, in Crim. Case No. 15-315717, finding Rey Cerilo y Fuentes (Rey) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

The Antecedents:

On May 4, 2015, Rey was charged with the crime of Murder in an Information 4 which alleged:

That on or about April 26, 2015, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused, conspiring and confederating with three (3) others, whose true names, real identities and present whereabouts are still unknown and helping one another, with intent to kill and abuse of superior strength, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon one TIRSO LOROT y ORALLER @ "ITOT," by then and there shooting the latter with an improvised gun on the different parts of the body, thereby inflicting upon the said TIRSO LOROT y ORALLER @ "ITOT" gunshot wounds which was (sic) the direct and immediate cause of his death thereafter.

Contrary to Law. 5

Upon arraignment, Rey pleaded not guilty to the offense charged. 6 Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

The prosecution presented as witnesses the following: Pedro Lorot (Pedro), Police Officer 1 Eizer Almero (PO1 Almero), Police Chief Inspector Jesille Cui Baluyot (PCI Baluyot), and Rosario Olivera Lorot (Lorot). 7 The parties agreed to dispense with the testimony of SPO4 Glensor A. Vallejo (SPO4 Vallejo) stating that he was the one who conducted the investigation and prepared the following the documents, to wit: (a) the Inquest Referral Letter; (b) the Crime Report; (c) the Booking Sheet and Arrest Report; (d) Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Pagtestigo ni Pedro Lorot y Calisay; (e) Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Pagsasakdal ni Marianne Lorot y Olivera; and (f) Joint Sworn Affidavit of Apprehension. 8 On the other hand, the defense presented the accused-appellant Rey himself, Ronnie Sabayo Cerilo (Ronnie), and Aldrin G. Eulin (Aldrin). 9

Evidence for the Prosecution:

Pedro, nephew of the victim Tirso Lorot (Tirso), testified 10 that on April 26, 2015 in Estero de Magdalena, Binondo, Manila, he was at the wake of their neighbor together with Tirso, Nestor Cerilo Sr. y Fuentes (Nestor Sr.), and Nestor Cerilo Jr. (Nestor Jr.). He narrated that while they were playing cara y cruz, Nestor Sr. got mad because he was already losing. Tirso then commented that Nestor Sr. should not be complaining since they were on the same team. Nestor Sr. then instructed Tirso to flip the coin higher in order for them to have better chances of winning. 11 However, Nestor Sr. suddenly stood up and shouted at them, "Tang ina ninyo. Gusto nyo yata ng gulo."12 Thereafter, Nestor Sr. and Nestor Jr. left the place. To their surprise, Nestor Sr. returned carrying an "itak" and a .38 caliber, while Nestor Jr. had with him a "sumpak." Jason Cerilo (Jason), son of Nestor Sr., and Rey chased Tirso but the latter was able to evade them. However, Jason and Rey eventually caught up with Tirso. Nestor Jr. shot Tirso with the sumpak but missed. Nestor Sr. then shot Tirso four (4) times using the .38 caliber. Jason and Rey, thereafter, let go of Tirso and ran away. Tirso was brought to the hospital but was declared dead on arrival. 13

On cross examination, 14 Pedro testified that they started playing cara y cruz at 6:00 in the evening. Rey was not playing cara y cruz with them until the shooting incident happened. Tirso and Rey had no quarrel or prior misunderstanding before the incident.

PO1 Almero testified 15 that on April 26, 2015, he was conducting a mobilized patrol together with PO1 Mark Lester Sacueza (PO1 Sacueza). At about 10:20 in the evening, they received a phone call from PO2 Salvador Sobremonte, Jr., informing them about a shooting incident at Recto near Masangkay. When they arrived at the crime scene, they saw Tirso lying on the ground. Thereafter, they proceeded to investigate the whereabouts of the perpetrators. Some bystanders informed them that the suspects fled towards Rizal Avenue. When they reached Rizal Avenue near Doroteo, they saw a man fitting the description relayed to them by the by standers.

PCI Baluyot, on the other hand, testified 16 on the post-mortem examination that she conducted on the victim. She testified that the victim suffered abrasions and gunshot wounds. 17

The Medico-Legal Report No. M-2015-154 18 listed the cause of death of the victim as multiple gunshot wounds to the body and extremity. The organs that were hit were the right lung, the liver, the mesentery and the intestines. 19

Lorot testified that she was the wife of the victim who was an ambulant vendor. She presented a receipt issued by Funeraria Lorenzo showing that they incurred funeral expenses amounting to P21,200.00. 20

Evidence for the Defense:

Accused-appellant Rey, however, narrated 21 a different version of the incident and denied that he was one of the assailants of Tirso. He alleged that on April 26, 2015 at around five o'clock in the afternoon, he was at home with his wife and children watching a movie. His wife then heard a gunshot. Upon checking, they learned from the bystanders that Tirso and Nestor Sr. fought while playing cara y cruz which culminated in the shooting incident. After about 45 minutes, several police officers, together with the brothers of Tirso, arrived at his house. Rey then hurriedly left his house together with his son Ronnie and walked towards Masangkay and Doroteo. While waiting for a jeepney, police officers asked him whether he was Cerilo Sr. and if his son was Cerilo Jr. They were brought to the police station where they saw the siblings of Tirso. While at the police station, he insisted that he was not the suspect or the gunman in the killing of Tirso. 22

Ronnie, accused-appellant's son, corroborated the testimony of his father Rey. He testified 23 that at the time of the incident, they were at their home watching a movie. Thereafter, they heard a gunshot prompting their mother to go out to check what happened. When their mother returned to their house, she narrated that the bystanders informed her that their father's brother, Nestor Sr., shot Tirso. Rey, thereafter, told him that they had to leave their house. While they were on their way to Doroteo, they were arrested by the police. At the police station, the siblings of Tirso pointed to his father as the suspect. Eventually, Ronnie was released.

Aldrin testified that he was attending a wake at the time of the incident. He alleged that Rey was not at the crime scene or was one of the assailants. He affirmed that it was Nestor Sr. who shot Tirso. 24

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court:

The RTC, in its Decision 25 dated June 1, 2017, found Rey guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder. The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the court finds accused Rey Cerilo y Fuentes GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

Accused is also hereby ordered to pay the heirs of the victim Tirso Lorot y Oraller @ "ITOT," the following amount[s]:

1. the sum of P21,200.00 by way of actual damages;

2. the sum of P50,000.00 by way of civil indemnity;

3. the sum of P50,000.00 by way of moral damages;

4. the sum of P50,000.00 by way of exemplary damages.

SO ORDERED. 26

The RTC lent credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses pointing to Nestor Sr. as the person who shot Tirso with a gun. Nestor Jr. and Jason were also present. The trial court found the testimony of Pedro that Nestor Sr. shot Tirso four (4) times with a .38 caliber consistent with the medico-legal report submitted by PCI Baluyot, stating therein that Tirso suffered four (4) gunshot wounds on different parts of his body. 27

The trial court found that Rey acted in conspiracy with Nestor Sr., Nestor Jr., and Jason in killing Tirso. The manner by which the crime was committed showed that Rey and his companions cooperated with one another toward a common design; not one of them prevented or attempted to prevent the others from inflicting injuries on Tirso. 28 While Rey did not personally fire the .38 caliber gun that led to the instantaneous death of Tirso, his inaction or failure to prevent Nestor Sr., his brother, from firing the said gun revealed that he participated in and assented to the commission of the crime. 29

Furthermore, the RTC ruled that accused-appellant's defense of alibi cannot prevail over Pedro's positive identification. Rey failed to offer any evidence that would support his alibi or establish that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the crime scene.

On the matter of the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, the trial court found that it was undeniable that there was gross inequality of forces between Tirso and accused-appellant Rey and his other companions. The medico-legal report and the anatomical sketches submitted by PCI Baluyot, and the certificate of death of Tirso, established that Tirso was shot multiple times which directly and immediately caused his death. Thus, the trial court concluded that it was Rey, in conspiracy with Nestor Sr., Nestor Jr., and Jason, who attacked and used personal violence upon Tirso which resulted in the latter's death. 30

Aggrieved, Rey appealed 31 his conviction before the CA claiming that the RTC erred in ruling that the prosecution was able to establish conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. He also maintained that the RTC erred in not giving credence to his defense of denial. 32

Ruling of the Court of Appeals:

In its Decision 33 dated July 6, 2018, the CA affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant for the crime of Murder. It sustained the finding of the RTC that the prosecution was able to establish all the elements of the crime of Murder and has proved the guilt of Rey beyond reasonable doubt. 34

The CA likewise agreed with the RTC that the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength attended the commission of the crime. The accused-appellant, together with the three (3) others, not only took advantage of their numerical superiority, but also armed themselves with an itak, sumpak, and a .38 caliber when they attacked and assaulted Tirso, who was unarmed. 35

Furthermore, it held that the RTC correctly inferred that there was conspiracy among the malefactors. Although it was only Nestor Sr. who inflicted the gunshot wounds on Tirso, the concerted acts of Nestor Jr., Rey, and Jason in catching Tirso implied conspiracy amongst them. 36

The CA likewise rejected the defense of alibi and denial of the accused-appellant. It held that the RTC correctly relied on the positive and consistent testimonies of the prosecution witnesses rather than the defense witnesses. 37

Finally, the CA held that considering the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, the trial court correctly found accused-appellant guilty of Murder and meted upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua. However, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, the CA deemed it proper to modify the awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 each, with interest of six percent (6%) from the date of finality of the judgment until full payment. 38

Thus, the dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The assailed Decision is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that the award[s] of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages are increased to P75,000.00 each. The award[s] of damages shall earn straight interest at the rate of 6% from the date of the finality of judgment until they be fully paid.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 39

Hence, the instant appeal.

Issue

Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the June 1, 2017 RTC Decision which found the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder.

Our Ruling

We rule in the negative.

Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, defines and penalizes the crime of Murder, to wit:

ART. 248. Murder. — Any person, who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:

1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity;

(Emphasis supplied)

Thus, to be convicted of the crime of Murder, the following elements must be established, to wit: (1) a person was killed; (2) the accused killed him or her; (3) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended; and (4) the killing constitutes neither parricide nor infanticide. 40

In the case at bar, the foregoing elements of the crime of Murder were duly established by the prosecution. Tirso was killed on the evening of April 26, 2015. Accused-appellant was identified as one of those who chased Tirso. It was also clearly shown that by his actions, Rey acted in conspiracy with the other assailants. Moreover, the prosecution satisfactorily established the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength. It is likewise indubitable that Tirso's killing was neither parricide nor infanticide. 41

We agree with the findings of the courts below that the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength attended the commission of the crime.

Jurisprudence dictates that for abuse of superior strength to be appreciated, the evidence must show that the assailants consciously sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage. To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use force excessively out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked. The appreciation of this aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size and strength of the parties. 42

As aptly pointed out by the CA, the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, which is determined by the excess of the aggressors' natural strength over that of the victims', is likewise shown by the fact that the four assailants not only took advantage of their numerical superiority, but also armed themselves with an itak, a sumpak, and a .38 caliber firearm when they ganged up on Tirso, who was unarmed and defenseless. 43

This is clear in the testimony of Pedro: