SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 233651. August 1, 2018.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DANIEL B. MALAGUPLO, VICTOR D. MALAGUPLO, JERRY J. ALCALA, RUDY M. MOSLARES and ROLAN A. MOSLARES, accused;
DANIEL B. MALAGUPLO and VICTOR D. MALAGUPLO, accused-appellants.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated01 August 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 233651 — PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee versus DANIEL B. MALAGUPLO, VICTOR D. MALAGUPLO, JERRY J. ALCALA, RUDY M. MOSLARES and ROLAN A. MOSLARES,accused; DANIEL B. MALAGUPLO and VICTOR D. MALAGUPLO,accused-appellants.
After a careful review of the records of the case as against the applicable law and jurisprudence, the Court finds the appeal to have no merit and that the Court of Appeals (CA) did not commit any reversible error in the assailed Decision. 1 The facts and the evidence presented by the prosecution support the conviction of accused-appellants Daniel Malaguplo (Daniel) and Victor Malaguplo (Victor) of the crime of Murder. The issues and matters raised before the Court, the same ones as those raised in the CA, there being no supplemental briefs filed, were sufficiently addressed and correctly ruled upon by the latter court. aScITE
The CA correctly appreciated the existence of conspiracy in the case at bar. Contrary to the allegations of Daniel and Victor, they were convincingly shown to have acted in concert to achieve a common purpose of killing Antonio Buco 2 (Antonio): (a) Daniel and Victor's acts in holding Antonio until Antonio fell on the ground after which Rolan Moslares (Rolan) shot him; (b) the corroboration of the testimonies of the eyewitnesses, the arresting police officers and the medico-legal officer; and (d) the absence of aid to bring the victim to the hospital all manifest concerted action. Thus, each should suffer the same criminal liability attached to the criminal act regardless of who fired the weapon.
The Court likewise affirms the amount of damages awarded by the CA as said amounts are in accord with prevailing jurisprudence. 3 Consistent with current policy, the CA was correct in imposing interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all damages awarded in this case reckoned from the finality of this Resolution until fully paid. 4 DETACa
WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVES to ADOPT the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Decision dated June 9, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08115. The Decision finding accused-appellants Daniel B. Malaguplo and Victor D. Malaguplo guilty of the crime of Murder is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 2-15. Decision dated June 9, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08115, penned by Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro, with Associate Justices Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles and Henri Jean Paul B. Inting concurring.
2. Also spelled as "Buko" in some parts of the rollo and CA rollo.
3.People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016).
4.People v. Bacatan, 718 Phil. 187, 204 (2013).