Republic of the Philippines of the Honorable Court, the above-named accused, during an

SUPREME COURT initiation rite and being then members of Alpha Phi Omega fraternity
Manila and present thereat, in conspiracy with more or less twenty other
members and officers, whose identity is not yet known, did then and
SECOND DIVISION there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously assault and use personal
violence upon one M4-RLON VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte
thereof and as condition for his admission to the fraternity, thereby
G.R. No. 209464               July 1, 2015
subjecting him to physical harm, resulting to his death, to the
damage and prejudice of the heirs of the victim.
DANDY L. DUNGO and GREGORIO A. SIBAL, JR., Petitioners,
vs.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

On February 7, 2006, upon motion, the RTC admitted the Amended

DECISION
Information5 which reads:
MENDOZA, J.:
That on or about 2:30 in the early morning of January 14, 2006, at
Villa Novaliches, Brgy. Pansol, Calamba City, Province of Laguna
The fraternal contract should not be signed in blood, celebrated with and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the above-name
pain, marred by injuries, and perpetrated through suffering. That is accused, during a planned initiation rite and being then officers and
the essence of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8049 or the Anti-Hazing Law members of Alpha Phi Omega fraternity and present thereat, in
of 1995. conspiracy with more or less twenty other members and officers,
whose identity is not yet known, did then and there willfully,
This is a petition for review on certiorari seeking to reverse and set unlawfully and feloniously assault and use personal violence upon
aside the April 26, 2013 Decision1 and the October 8, 2013 one MARLON VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte thereof and as
Resolution2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. condition for his admission to the fraternity, thereby subjecting him to
05046, which affirmed the February 23, 2011 Decision 3 of the physical harm, resulting to his death, to the damage and prejudice of
Regional Trial Court, Branch 36, Calamba City (RTC). The RTC the heirs of the victim. CONTRARY TO LAW.
found petitioners Dandy L. Dungo (Dungo) and Gregorio A. Sibal, Jr.
(Sibal), guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of violation of On February 7, 2006, Dungo filed a motion to quash for lack of
Section 4 of R.A. No. 8049, and sentenced them to suffer the penalty probable cause,6 but it was denied by the trial court because the
of reclusion perpetua. ground cited therein was not provided by law and jurisprudence.
When arraigned, the petitioners pleaded not guilty to the crime
The Facts charged.7 Thereafter, trial ensued.

On February 1, 2006, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Calamba, Version of the Prosecution
Laguna, filed the Information4 against the petitioners before the R
TC, the accusatory portion of which reads: That on or about 2:30 in The prosecution presented twenty (20) witnesses to prove the crime
the early morning of January 14, 2006, at Villa Novaliches, Brgy. charged. Their testimonies are summarized as follows:
Pansol, Calamba ,City, Province of Laguna and within the jurisdiction
At around 3:20 o'clock in the morning of January 14, 2006, the victim cause of death was subdural hemorrhage due to head injury
Marlon Villanueva (Villanueva) was brought to the emergency room contusion-hematoma. Based on multiple injuries and contusions on
of Dr. Jose P. Rizal District Hospital (JP Rizal Hospital). Dr. Ramon the body, and his previous examinations of hazing injuries, Dr.
Masilungan (Dr. Masilungan), who was then the attending physician Camarillo opined that these injuries were hazing-related. During the
at the emergency room, observed that Villanueva was motionless, autopsy, he retrieved two (2) matchsticks from the cadaver with the
not breathing and had no heartbeat. Dr. Masilungan tried to revive marking of Alpha Phi Omega (APO) Fraternity.10
Villlanueva for about 15 to 30 minutes. Villanueva, however, did not
respond to the resuscitation and was pronounced dead. Dr. Susan Ignacio (Ignacio) was the owner of the sari-sari store located
Masilungan noticed a big contusion hematoma on the left side of the at Purok 5, Pansol, Calamba City, in front of Villa Novaliches Resort,
victim's face and several injuries on his arms and legs. He further which was barely ten steps away. On January 13, 2006, at around
attested that Villanueva 's face was cyanotic, meaning that blood 8:30 to 9:00 o'clock in the evening, she was tending her store when
was no longer running through his body due to lack of oxygen; and she saw a jeepney with more than twenty (20) persons arrive at the
when he pulled down Villanueva's pants, he saw large contusions on resort. Ignacio identified Dungo as the person seated beside the
both legs, which extended from the upper portion of the thighs, down driver of the jeepney.11 She estimated the ages of these persons in
to the couplexial portion, or back of the knees. the group to be between 20 to 30 years old. They were in civilian
clothes, while the other men wore white long-sleeved shirts. Before
Dr. Masilungan disclosed that two (2) men brought Villanueva to the entering the resort, the men and women shook hands and embraced
hospital. The two told him that they found Villanueva lying motionless each other. Three (3) persons, riding on a single motorcycle, also
on the ground at a store in Brgy. Pansol, Calamba City, and brought arrived at the resort.
him to the hospital. When he asked them where they came from, one
of them answered that they came from Los Baños, Laguna, en route Ignacio saw about fifteen (15) persons gather on top of the terrace of
to San Pablo City. He questioned them on how they found the resort who looked like they were praying, and then the lights of
Villanueva, when the latter was in Brgy. Pansol, Calamba City. One the resort were turned off. Later that evening, at least three (3) of
of the men just said that they were headed somewhere else. these persons went to her store to buy some items. During her
testimony, she was shown photographs and she identified
Dr. Masilungan reduced his findings in a medico-legal report. 8 Due to Christopher Braseros and Sibal as two of those who went to her
the nature, extent and location of the injuries, he opined that store.12 It was only on the morning of January 14, 2006 that she
Villanueva was a victim of hazing. He was familiar with hazing learned from the policemen visiting the resort that the deceased
injuries because he had undergone hazing himself when he was a person was Villanueva.
student, and also because of his experience in treating victims of
hazing incidents. Donato Magat (Magat), a tricycle driver plying the route of Pansol,
Calamba City, testified that at around 3:00 o'clock in the morning of
Dr. Roy Camarillo (Dr. Camarillo), Medico-Legal Officer of the January 14, 2006, he was waiting for passengers at the comer of
Philippine National Police Crime Laboratory (PNP-CL) in Region IV, Villa Novaliches Resort. A man approached him and told him that
Camp Vicente Lim, Canlubang, Calamba City, testified that he someone inside the resort needed a ride. Magat went to the resort
performed an autopsy on the body of Villanueva on January 14, and asked the two (2) men at the gate who needed a ride.
2006 and placed down his findings in an autopsy report. 9 Upon Afterwards, he saw three (3) men in their 20's carrying another man,
examination of the body, he found various external injuries in the who looked very weak, like a vegetable, towards his tricycle. Magat
head, trunk and extremities. There were thirty-three (33) external touched the body of the man being carried and sensed it was cold.
injuries, with various severity and nature. He concluded that the
Magat asked the men what happened to their companion. They Gay Czarina Sunga (Sunga) was a food technology student at UP
replied that he had too much to drink. Then they instructed Magat to Los Baños during the academic year of 2005-2006 and a member of
go to the nearest hospital. He drove the tricycle to JP Rizal Hospital. the Symbiosis UPLB Biological Society. Around 3:00 o'clock in the
Upon their arrival, two of his passengers brought their unconscious afternoon of January 13, 2006, she was at their organization's
companion inside the emergency room, while their other companion tambayan in the UPLB Biological Sciences Building, when she
paid the tricycle fare. Magat then left to go home. Several days after, noticed three (3) men seated two meters away from her. She
he learned that the person brought to the hospital had died. identified the two of the three men as Sibal and Dungo. 14 They were
wearing black shirts with the logo of APO. Later at 5:00 o'clock in the
Abelardo Natividad (Natividad) and Seferino Espina y Jabay (Espina) afternoon, two more men arrived and, with their heads bowed,
were the security guards on duty at JP Rizal Hospital, from 11 :00 approached the three men. One of them was Villanueva, who was
o'clock in the evening of January 13, 2006 until 7:00 o'clock in the carrying a 5-gallon water container. Dungo then stood up and asked
morning of January 14, 2006. In the early morning of January 14, Villanueva why the latter did not report to him when he was just at
2006, two men, who signed on the logbook 13 under the names their tambayan. Dungo then punched Villanueva twice, but the latter
Brandon Gonzales and Jerico Paril, brought the lifeless body of a just kept quiet with his head bowed. Fifteen minutes later, all the men
person. Pursuant to the standard operating procedure of the hospital, left.
the security guards did not allow the two men to leave the hospital
because they called the police station .so that an investigation could Joey Atienza (Atienza) had been a good friend of Villanueva since
be conducted. Two policemen arrived later at the hospital. During his 2004. They were roommates at the UP Los Baños Men's Dormitory
testimony, Natividad identified Sibal and Dupgo as the two persons and housemates at the DPS Apartment in Umali Subdivision, Los
who brought Villanueva to the hospital. Baños, Laguna. According to Atienza, on January 9, 2006,
Villanueva introduced him to Daryl Decena (Decena) as his APO -
PO2 Alaindelon Ignacio (P02 Ignacio). testified that on January 14, Theta Chapter batchmate, who was also to undergo final initiation
2006 at around 3:30 o'clock in the early morning, Natividad called up rites on January 13, 2006.
the PNP Calamba City Station to report that a lifeless body of a man
was brought to JP Rizal Hospital. When P02 Ignacio arrived, he saw Severino Cuevas, Director of the Students Affairs at UP Los Baños,
Villanueva' s corpse with contusions and bite marks all over his body. testified that Dungo and Sibal were both members of the APO
P02 Ignacio and his policemen companions then brought Dungo and Fraternity, and that there was no record of any request for initiation
Sibal to the police station. He asked them about what happened, but or hazing activity filed by the said fraternity.
they invoked their right to remain silent. The policemen then
proceeded to Brgy. Pansol at around 9:00 o'clock in the morning. McArthur Padua of the Office of the Registrar, UP Los Baños,
After finding Villa Novaliches Resort, they knocked on the door and testified that Villanueva was a B.S. Agricultural Economics student at
the caretaker, Maricel Capillan (Capillan), opened it. the UP Los Baños,15 as evidenced by his official transcript of
record.16
The police asked Capillan if there were University of the Philippines
Los Baños (UP Los Baños) students who rented the resort on the Atty. Eleno Peralta and Dina S. Carlos, officers of the Student
evening of January 13, 2006. Capillan said yes and added that about Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) of the UP Los Baños, testified that an
twenty (20) persons arrived onboard a jeepney and told her that they administrative disciplinary case was filed on March 31, 2006 against
would be renting the resort from 9:30 o'clock in the evening up to the APO Fraternity regarding the death of Villanueva. They
7:00 o'clock the following morning. confirmed that Capilla of Villa Novaliches Resort and Irene Tan (Tan)
of APO Sorority Theta Chapter appeared as witnesses for the came and visited her at her boarding house on Raymundo Street.
complainant.17 Around 4:00 o'clock of the same afternoon, they went to the UP Los
Baños Graduate School and saw Cornelio. Afterwards, they went
Roman Miguel De Jesus, UP - Office of the Legal Aid (UP-OLA) back to her boarding house and stayed there from 5:00 o'clock in the
supervising student, testified that he met Tan of the APO Sorority afternoon to 7:00 o'clock in the evening. Then, they went to Lacxo
sometime between July and August 2006 in UP Diliman: to convince Restaurant for dinner and left at around 10:00 o'clock in the evening.
her to testify in the criminal case. Tan, however, refused because On their way back to her boarding house, they encountered Cornelio
she feared for her safety. She said that after testifying in the SDT again at the Burger Machine. Dungo then stayed and slept at her
hearing, her place in Imus, Cavite was padlocked and vandalized. boarding house. Around 2:00 o'clock in the early morning of January
14, 2006, they were roused from their sleep by a phone call from
Sibal, asking Dungo to go to a resort in Pansol, Calamba City.
Evelyn Villanueva, mother of victim Villanueva, testified that, as a
Dungo then left the boarding house.
result of the death of her son, her family incurred actual damages
consisting of medical, burial and funeral expenses in the aggregate
amount of ₱140,000.00 which were evidenced by receipts. 18 Her Dungo testified that around 1:00 o'clock in the early afternoon of
husband also incurred travel expenses in the amount of ₱7,000.00 in January 13, 2006, he arrived at the boarding house of his girlfriend,
returning to the Philippines to attend his son's wake and burial, as Rivera, on Raymundo Street. At around 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon,
supported by a plane ticket.19 She further attested that she they went to the UP Los Baños Graduate School and inquired about
experienced mental anguish, sleepless nights, substantial weight the requirements for a master's degree. They walked back to the
loss, and strained family relationship as a result of her son's death. boarding house and met Cornelio. They talked about their fraternity's
,final initiation ceremony for that night in Pansol, Calamba City.
Dungo and Rivera then reached the latter's boarding house around
Version of the Defense
5:00 o'clock in the afternoon. At around 7:00 o'clock in the evening,
they went out for dinner at the Lacxo Restaurant, near Crossing
The defense presented seven (7) witnesses to prove the innocence Junction, Los Baños. They ate and stayed at the restaurant for at
of the petitioners. Their testimonies are summarized as follow: least one and a half hours. Then they walked back to the boarding
house of Rivera and, along the way, they met Cornelio again at the
Richard Cornelio (Cornelio), an APO Fraternity member, testified that Burger Machine along Raymundo Street. Cornelio asked Dungo if he
on January 13, 2006, around 4:00 to 4:30 o'clock in the afternoon, he would attend their fraternity's final initiation ceremony, to which he
met Dungo at the UP Los Baños Graduate School. Dungo asked him replied in the negative. Dungo and Rivera reached the boarding
if he would attend the initiation ceremony, and Cornelio answered in house around 9:00 o'clock in the evening and they slept there.
the negative because he had other things to do. At 10:00 o'clock in
the evening of the same day, Cornelio again met Dungo and his Around 2:00 o'clock in the early morning of January 14, 2006, Dungo
girlfriend while eating a hamburger at the Burger Machine along was roused from his sleep because Sibal was palling him on his
Raymundo Street, Umali Subdivision, Los Baños, Laguna cellphone. Sibal asked for his help, requesting him to go to Villa
(Raymundo Street). He asked Dungo if he would attend the initiation Novaliches Resort in Pansol, Calamba City. Upon Dungo 's arrival at
ceremony. Dungo replied that he would not because he and his the resort, Sibal led him inside. There, he saw Rudolfo Castillo
girlfriend had something to do. (Castillo), a fellow APO fraternity brother, and Villanueva, who was
unconscious. Dungo told them that they should bring Villanueva to
Ana Danife Rivera (Rivera), the girlfriend of Dungo, testified that on the hospital. They all agreed, and Castillo called a tricycle that
January 13, 2006 at around 1 :00 o'clock in the afternoon, Dungo brought them to JP Rizal Hospital. He identified himself before the
security guard as Jerico Paril because he was scared to tell his real After the group of Gopez left, Sibal checked on the condition of
name. Villanueva, who was sleeping on the second; floor of the resort. Then
he went outside for one hour, or until 1 :00 o 'dock in the early
Gilbert Gopez (Gopez) testified that he was the Grand Chancellor of morning of January 14, 2006. Sibal entered the resort again and saw
the APO -Theta Chapter for years 2005-2006. At around 7:00 o'clock Villanueva, who looked unconscious, seated in one of the benc6es
in the evening of January 13, 2006, he was at the tambayan of their on the ground floor. Sibal inquired about Villanueva's condition but
fraternity in UP Los Baños because their neophytes would be he was ignored by Castillo. He then called Dungo for help. After
initiated that night. Around 8:30 o'clock in the evening, they met their Dungo arrived at the resort, they hailed a tricycle and brought
fraternity brothers in Bagong Kalsada, Los Baños. He noticed that Villanueva to JP Rizal Hospital. There, he gave a false name to the
their neophyte, Villanueva, was with Castillo and that there was a security guard as he heard that Dungo had done the same.
bruise on the left side of his face. Then they boarded a jeepney and
proceeded to Villa Novaliches Resort in Pansol, Calamba City. The RTC Ruling
There, Gopez instructed Sibal to take Villanueva to the second floor
of the resort. He confronted Castillo as to what happened to On February 23, 2011, the RTC found Dungo and Sibal guilty of the
Villanueva. Around 11:00 or 11:30 o'clock in the evening, Gopez crime of violating Section 4 of the Anti-Hazing Law and sentenced
decided to cancel the final rites. He told Sibal to stay at the resort them to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The trial court stated
and accompany Villanueva and Castillo. Together with the other that the prosecution established the presence of Dungo and Sibal (1)
neophytes, Gopez left the resort and went back to UP Los Baños. at the UP Los Banos Campus on January 13, 2006 around 3:00
o'clock in the afternoon, by the testimony of Sunga and (2) at the
Sibal testified that he was a DOST Scholar at the UP Los Baños Villa Novaliches Resort around 9:00 o'clock in the evening of the
from 2002 to 2006, taking up B.S. Agricultural Chemistry. He was a same day by the testimony of Ignacio. With the extensive testimonies
Brother Actuary of the APO - Theta Chapter, and was in charge of of Dr. Masilungan and Dr. Camarillo, the prosecution also proved
fraternity activities, such as tree planting, free medical and dental that Villanueva died from hazing injuries.
missions, and blood donations. On January 13, 2006, at around 6:00
o'clock in the evening, he was at the fraternity's tambayan for the According to the RTC, the evidence of the prosecution undeniably
final initiation rites of their neophytes. After preparing the food for the proved that Villanueva, a UP Los Bafios student, was a neophyte of
initiation rites, Sibal, together with some neophytes, went to Bagong the APO - Theta Chapter Fraternity; that Dungo and Sibal were
Kalsada, Los Baños, where he saw fellow fraternity brother Castillo members of the said fraternity; that on the evening of January 13,
with their neophyte Villanueva, who had a bruised face. Thereafter, 2006, Dungo and Sibal, together with the other fraternity members,
they boarded a jeepney and proceeded to Villa Novaliches Resort in officers and alumni, brought and transported Villanueva and two
Pansol, Calamba City. Once inside the resort, he accompanied other neophytes to Villa Novaliches Resort at Barangay Pansol,
Villanueva upstairs for the latter to take a rest. A few minutes later, Calamba City, for the final initiation rites; that the initiation rites were
he went down and confronted Castillo about the bruises on conducted inside the resort, performed under the cover of darkness
Villanueva's face. He was angry and irritated with Castillo. He then and secrecy; that due to the injuries sustained by Villanueva, the
stayed outside the resort until Gopez and the other neophytes came fraternity members and the other two neophytes haphazardly left the
out and told him that the final initiation rite was cancelled, and that resort; and that Dungo and Sibal boarded a tricycle and brought the
they were returning to UP Los Baños. Sibal wanted to go with them lifeless body of Villanueva to JP Rizal Hospital, where Villanueva
but ;he was ordered to stay with Villanueva and Castillo. was pronounced dead.
The RTC explained that even if there was no evidence that Dungo constitutionality of Section 4 of the said law, which stated that mere
and Sibal participated to bodily assault and harm the victim, it was presence in the hazing was prima facie evidence of participation
irrefutable that they brought Villanueva to the resort for their final therein, because it allegedly violated the constitutional presumption
initiation rites. Clearly, they did not merely induce Villanueva to of innocence of the accused.
attend the final initiation rites, but they also brought him to Villa
Novaliches Resort. The CA Ruling

The RTC held that the defense of denial and alibi were self-serving The CA ruled that the appeal of Dungo and Sibal was bereft of merit.
negative assertions. The defense of denial and alibi of Dungo, which It stated that, in finding them guilty of violating R.A. No. 8049, the
was corroborated by the testimony of his girlfriend Rivera and his co- RTC properly relied on circumstantial evidence adduced by the
fraternity brother, could not be given credence. The witnesses prosecution. The CA painstakingly discussed the unbroken chain of
presented by the defense were partial and could not be considered circumstantial evidence to convict Dungo and Sibal as principals in
as disinterested parties. The defense of denial of Sibal likewise the crime of hazing.
failed. The corroborative testimonies of his fraternity brothers were
suspect because they had so much at stake in the outcome of the It further found that the defense of denial and alibi of Dungo and
criminal action. Sibal failed to cast doubt on the positive identification made by the
prosecution witnesses; and that denial, being inherently weak, could
The decretal portion of the decision reads: not prevail over the positive identification of the accused as the
perpetrators of the crime. The CA also stated that Dungo and Sibal
WHEREFORE, the Court finds the accused Dandy Dungo and were not only convicted based on their presence in the venue of the
Gregorio Sibal GUILTY of violating Section 4 of the Anti-Hazing Law hazing, but also in their act of bringing the victim to Villa Novaliches
and sentenced them to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION Resort for the final initiation rites.
PERPETUA and order them to jointly and severally pay the family
/heirs of Deceased Marlon Villanueva the following sums of money: The dispositive portion of the decision reads:

1. ₱141,324.00 for and as actual damages; WHEREFORE, premises considered, the February 23, 2011
Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 36 of Calamba City in
2. ₱200,000.00 for and as moral damages; CRIM. Case No. 13958-2006-C, finding accused-appellant guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of Violation of R.A. 8049 is hereby
3. ₱100,000.00 for and as exemplary damages; and AFFIRMED in TOTO.

4. ₱50,000.00 for the death of Marlon Villanueva. SO ORDERED.21

SO ORDERED.20 Dungo and Sibal moved for reconsideration but their motion was
denied by the CA in the assailed October 8, 2013 Resolution.
Aggrieved, the petitioners filed a notice of appeal. In their brief, they
contended that the prosecution failed to establish their guilt beyond Hence, this petition.
reasonable doubt for violating R.A. No. 8049. They also assailed the
SOLE ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR HE JUDGMENTS OF THE RTC The Court's Ruling
AND THE CA A QUO CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED TO BE INFORMED The petition lacks merit.
OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION AGAINST THEM
BECAUSE THE OFFENSE PROVED AS FOUND AND Procedural Matter
PRONOUNCED THEREBY IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT
CHARGED IN THE INFORMATION, NOR DOES ONE INCLUDE
OR NECESSARILY INCLUDE THE OTHER.22 An appeal is a proceeding undertaken to have a decision
reconsidered by bringing it to a higher court authority. 29 The right to
appeal is neither a natural right nor is it a component of due process.
Petitioners Dungo and Sibal argue that the amended information It is a mere statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in the
charged them as they "did then and there willfully, unlawfully and manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. 30
feloniously assault and use personal violence upon one Marlon
Villanueva y Mejilla."23 Yet, both the RTC and the CA found them
guilty of violating R.A. No. 8049 because they "[i]nduced the victim to Section 13(c), Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,
be present"24 during the initiation rites. The crime of hazing by as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03, dated October 15, 2004, governs
inducement does not necessarily include the criminal charge of the procedure on the appeal from the CA to the Court when the
hazing by actual participation. Thus, they cannot be convicted of a penalty imposed is either reclusion perpetua or life
crime not stated or necessarily included in the information. By reason imprisonment.31 According to the said provision, "[i]n cases where
of the foregoing, the petitioners contend that their constitutional right the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment
to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against them or a lesser penalty, it shall render and enter judgment imposing such
has been violated. penalty. The judgment may be appealed to the Supreme Court by
notice of appeal filed with the Court of Appeals."
In its Comment,25 filed on May 23, 2014, the Office of the Solicitor
General (DSG) asserted that Dungo and Sibal were charged in the Hence, an accused, upon whom the penalty of reclusion perpetua or
amended information with the proper offense and convicted for such. life imprisonment had been imposed by the CA, can simply file a
The phrases "planned initiation" and "in conspiracy with more or less notice of appeal to allow him to pursue an appeal as a matter of right
twenty members and officers" in the amended information sufficiently before the Court. An appeal in a criminal case opens the entire case
cover "knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by inducing for review on any question including one not raised by the
the victim to be present thereat." The planned initiation rite would not parties.32 Section 13(c), Rule 124 recognizes the constitutionally
have been accomplished were it not for the acts of the petitioners in conferred jurisdiction of the Court in all criminal cases in which the
inducing the victim to be present thereat and it was obviously penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.33
conducted in conspiracy with the others. 26 In their Reply27 filed on
September 10, 2014, Dungo and Sibal insisted that there was a An accused, nevertheless, is not precluded in resorting to an appeal
variance between the, offense charged of "actually participated in the by certiorari to the Court via Rule 45 under the Rules of Court. An
infliction of physical harm," and the offense "knowingly cooperated in appeal to this Court by petition for review on certiorari shall raise only
carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be present questions of law.34 Moreover, such review is not a matter of right, but
thereat."28 The prosecution, moreover, failed to establish conspiracy of sound judicial discretion, and will be granted only when there are
because no act or circumstance was proved pointing to a joint special and important reasons.35 In other words, when the CA
purpose and design between and among the petitioners and the imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, an
other twenty accused. accused may: (1) file a notice of appeal under Section 13( c ), Rule
124 to avail of an appeal as a matter of right before the Court and There are different definitions of hazing, depending on the laws of
open the entire case for review on any question; or (2) file a petition the states.40 In the case of People v. Lenti,41 the defendant therein
for review on certiorari under Rule 45 to resort to an appeal as a challenged the constitutionality of the state law defining hazing on
matter of discretion and raise only questions of law. the ground of vagueness. The court rejected such contention and
held that it would have been an impossible task if the legislature had
In this case, the CA affirmed the R TC decision imposing the penalty attempted to define hazing specifically
of reclusion perpetua upon the petitioners. The latter opted to appeal
the CA decision via a petition for certiorari under Rule 45. because fraternal organizations and associations never suffered for
Consequently, they could only raise questions of law. Oddly, the ideas in contriving new forms of hazing. Presently, the acceptable
petitioners began to assail the existence of conspiracy in their definition of hazing is the practice of physically or emotionally
reply,36 which is a question of fact that would require an examination abusing newcomers to an organization as a means of initiation. 42
of the evidence ;presented. In the interest of justice, however, and
due to the novelty of the issue presented, the Court deems it proper Hazing can be classified into various categories including, but not
to open the whole case for review.37 Substantive Matter limited to, acts of violence, acts of humiliation, sexual-related acts,
and alcohol-related acts.43 The physical form of hazing may include
In our contemporary society, hazing has been a nightmare of parents beating, branding, paddling, excessive exercise, drinking, and using
who send their children to college or university. News of deaths and drugs. Sexual hazing have included simulated sex acts, sodomy and
horrible beatings primarily among college students due to hazing forced kissing.44 Moreover, hazing does not only result in physical
injuries continue to haunt us. Horrid images of eggplant-like buttocks injuries and hospitalization, but also lead to emotional damage and
and thighs and pounded arms and shoulders of young men are traumatic stress.45
depicted as a fervent warning to those who dare undergo the hazing
rites. The meaningless death of these promising students, and the Based on statistics and alarming frequency of hazing, states have
agony, cries and ordeal of their families, resonate through the very attempted to combat hazing through the passage of state laws that
core of our beings. But no matter how modem and sophisticated our prohibit such acts.46 Forty-four states, with the exception of Alaska,
society becomes, these barbaric acts of initiation of fraternities, Hawaii, Montana, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Wyoming, have
sororities and other organizations continue to thrive, even within the passed anti-hazing laws.47 The severity of these laws can range from
elite grounds of the academe. minor penalties to a prison sentence for up to six years. 48 In the
states of Illinois, Idaho, Missouri, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, hazing
The history and phenomenon of hazing had been thoroughly that result in death or "great bodily harm" is categorized as a felony. 49
discussed in the recent case of Villareal v. People. 38 It is believed
that the fraternity system and its accompanying culture of hazing In Florida, the Chad Meredith Act, 50 a law named after a student who
were transported by the Americans to the Philippines in the late 19th died in a hazing incident, was enacted on July 1, 2005. It provides
century.39 Thus, a study of the laws and jurisprudence of the United that a person commits a third degree felony when he or she
States (US) on hazing can enlighten the current predicament of intentionally or recklessly commits any act of hazing and the hazing
violent initiations in fraternities, sororities and other organizations. results in serious bodily injury or death. If a person only creates
substantial risk of physical injury or death, then hazing is categorized
United States Laws and as a first degree misdemeanor. A similar provision can be observed
Jurisprudence on Hazing in the Penal Law of New York.51
Interestingly, some states included notable features in their anti- effectively contributed to the death of the victim as part of their
hazing statute to increase its effectiveness. In Alabama, Arkansas, hazing.
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Texas, the law
imposes a duty on school personnel to report hazing. 52 In fact, in Even in high school, hazing could exist. In Nice v. Centennial Area
Alabama, no person is allowed to knowingly permit, encourage, aid, School District,61 a tenth-grade wrestler at William Tennet High
or assist any person in committing the offense of hazing, or willfully School was subjected to various forms of hazing, including; a ritual
acquiesces in its commission.53 where the victim was forcibly held down, while a teammate sat on his
face with his buttocks exposed. The parents of the student sued the
Also, some states enacted statutes that have been interpreted to school because it failed to prevent the incident despite its knowledge
mean that persons are guilty of hazing even if they have the consent of the hazing rites. The court approved the settlement of the parties
of the victim.54 In New Jersey, consent is not a defense to a hazing in the amount ofUS$151,000.00.
charge, and its law permits the prosecution of offenders under other
applicable criminal statutes.55 By including these various provisions More recently, the case of Yost v. Wabash College 62 involved the
in their anti-hazing statutes, these states have removed the hazing of an 18-year old freshman, who suffered physical and mental
subjective inquiry of consent from consideration, thus, presumably injuries in the initiation rites conducted by the Phi Kappa Psi
allowing courts to effectively and properly adjudicate hazing cases. 56 fraternity. As a pledge, the victim was thrown into a creek and was
placed in a chokehold, until he lost consciousness. The court upheld
In the US, hazing victims can either file a criminal action, based on that action against the local fraternity because, even if the student
anti-hazing statutes, or a civil suit, arising from tort law and consented, the fraternity had the duty to ensure the safety of its
constitutional law, against the members of the local fraternity, the activities.
national fraternity and even against the university or college
concerned.57 Hazing, which threatens to needlessly harm students, The US anti-hazing laws and jurisprudence show that victims of
must be attacked from whatever legal means are possible. 58 hazing can properly attain redress before the court. By crafting laws
and prosecuting offenders, the state can address the distinct
In State v. Brown,59 a member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha at Kent dilemma of hazing.
State University was indicted for complicity to hazing. The group
physically disciplined their pledges by forcing them to stand on their Anti-Hazing Law in the
heads, beating them with paddles, and smacking and striking Philippines
initiates in the face and head. The Ohio court held that evidence
presented therein was more than sufficient to sustain a conviction. R.A. No. 8049, or the Anti-Hazing Law .of 1995, has been enacted to
regulate hazing and other forms of initiation rites in fraternities,
Excessive intake of alcohol in the fraternity initiations can be sororities, and other organizations. It was in response to the rising
considered as hazing. In Oja v. Grand Chapter of Theta Chi incidents of death of hazing victims, particularly the death of
Fraternity Inc.,60 a 17-year old college freshman died as a result of Leonardo "Lenny" Villa.63 Despite its passage, reports of deaths
aspirating his own vomit after consuming excessive amounts of resulting from i hazing continue to emerge. Recent victims were
alcohol in a fraternity initiation ritual. The defendants in the said case Guillo Servando of the College of St. Benilde, Marc Andre Marcos
contended that they only furnished the alcohol drinks to the victim. and Marvin Reglos of the San', Beda College - Manila, and Cris
The court denied the defense because such acts of the fraternity Anthony Mendez of the University of the Philippines - Diliman. With
the continuity of these senseless tragedies, one question implores SENATOR LINA. That is correct, Mr. President.
for an answer: is R.A. No. 8049 a sufficient deterrent against hazing?
SENATOR GUINGONA If hazing is done at present and it results in
To answer the question, the Court must dissect the provisions of the death, the charge would be murder or homicide.
law and scrutinize its effect, implication and application.
SENATOR LINA. That is correct, Mr. President.
Criminal law has long divided crimes into acts wrong in themselves
called acts mala in se; and acts which would not be wrong but for the SENATOR GUINGONA. If it does not result in death, it may be
fact that positive law forbids them, called acts mala prohibita. This frustrated homicide or serious physical injuries.
distinction is important with reference to the intent with which a
wrongful act is done. The rule on the subject is that in acts mala in SENATOR LINA. That is correct, Mr. President.
se, the intent governs; but in acts mala prohibita, the only inquiry is,
has the law been violated? When an act is illegal, the intent of the
offender is immaterial.64 When the doing of an act is prohibited by SENATOR GUINGONA. Or, if the person who commits sexual abuse
law, it is considered injurious to public welfare, and the doing of the does so it can be penalized under rape or acts of lasciviousness.
prohibited act is the crime itself.65
SENATOR LINA. That is correct, Mr. President.
A common misconception is that all mala in se crimes are found in
the Revised Penal Code (RPC), while all mala prohibita crimes are SENATOR GUINGONA. So, what is the rationale for making a new
provided by special penal laws. In reality, however, there may be offense under this definition of the crime of hazing?
mala in se crimes under special laws, such as plunder under R.A.
No. 7080, as amended.66 Similarly, there may be mala prohibita SENATOR LINA. To discourage persons or group of persons either
crimes defined in the RPC, such as technical malversation. 67 composing a sorority, fraternity or any association from making this
requirement of initiation that has already resulted in these specific
The better approach to distinguish between mala in se and mala acts or results, Mr. President.
prohibita crimes is the determination of the inherent immorality or
vileness of the penalized act. If the punishable act or .omission is That is the main rationale. We want to send a strong signal across
immoral in itself, then it is a crime mala in se,- on the contrary, if it is the land that no group or association can require the act of physical
not immoral in itself, but there is a statute prohibiting its commission initiation before a person can become a member without being held
b)". reasons of public policy, then it is mala prohibita. In the final criminally liable.
analysis, whether or not a crime involves moral turpitude is ultimately
a question of fact and frequently depends on all the circumstances x x x           x x x          x x x
surrounding the violation of the statute.68
SENATOR GUINGONA. Yes, but what would be the rationale for
The crime of hazing under R.A. No. 8049 is malum prohibitum. The that imposition? Because the distinguished Sponsor has said that he
Senate deliberations would show that the lawmakers intended the is not punishing a mere organization, he is not seeking the
anti-hazing statute to be ma/um prohibitum, as follows: SENATOR punishment of an initiation into a club or organization, he is seeking
GUINGONA: Most of these acts, if not all, are already punished the punishment of certain acts that resulted in death, etcetera as a
under the Revised Penal Code. result of hazing which are already covered crimes.
The penalty is increased in one, because we would like to x x x           x x x          x x x
discourage hazing, abusive hazing, but it may be a legitimate
defense for invoking two or more charges or offenses, because SENATOR GUINGONA. I join the lofty motives, Mr. President, of the
these very same acts are already punishable under the Revised distinguished Sponsor. But I am again disturbed by his statement
Penal Code that the prosecution does not have to prove the intent that resulted in
the death, that resulted in the serious physical injuries, that resulted
That is my difficulty, Mr. President. in the acts of lasciviousness or deranged mind. We do not have to
prove the willful intent of the accused in proving or establishing the
SENATOR LINA. x x x crime of hazing. This seems, to me, a novel situation where we
create the special crime without having to go into the intent, which is
one of the basic elements of any crime.
Another point, Mr. President, is this, and this is a very telling
difference: When a person or group of persons resort to hazing as a
requirement for gaining entry into an organization, the intent to If there is no intent, there is no crime. If the intent were merely to
commit a wrong is not visible or is not present, Mr. President. initiate, then there is no offense. And even the distinguished Sponsor
Whereas, in these specific crimes, Mr. President, let us say there is admits that the organization, the intent to initiate, the intent to have a
death or there is homicide, mutilation, if one files a case, then the new society or a new club is, per se, not punishable at all. What are
intention to commit a wrong has to be proven. But if the crime of punishable are the acts that lead to the result. But if these results are
hazing is the basis, what is important is the result from the act of not going to be proven by intent, but just because there was hazing, I
hazing. am afraid that it will disturb the basic concepts of the Revised Penal
Code, Mr. President.
To me, that is the basic difference and that is what will prevent or
deter the sororities or fraternities; that they should really shun this SENATOR LINA. Mr. President, the act of hazing, precisely, is being
activity called "hazing." Because, initially, these fraternities or criminalized because in the context of what is happening in the
sororities do not even consider having a neophyte killed or maimed sororities and fraternities, when they conduct hazing, no one will
or that acts of lasciviousness are even committed initially, Mr. admit that their intention is to maim or to kill. So, we are already
President. criminalizing the fact of inflicting physical pain. Mr. President, it is a
criminal act and we want it stopped, deterred, discouraged.
So, what we want to discourage, is the so-called initial innocent act.
That is why there is need to institute this kind of hazing. Ganiyan po If that occurs, under this law, there is no necessity to prove that the
ang nangyari. Ang fraternity o ang sorority ay magre-recruit. Wala masters intended to kill or the masters intended to maim. What is
talaga silang intensiybng makamatay. Hindi ko na babanggitin at important is the result of the act of hazing. Otherwise, the masters or
buhay pa iyong kaso. Pero dito sa anim o pito na namatay nitong those who inflict the physical pain can easily escape responsibility
nakaraang taon, walang intensiyong patayin talaga iyong neophyte. and say, "We did not have the intention to kill. This is part of our
So, kung maghihintay pa tayo, na saka lamang natin isasakdal ng initiation rites. This is normal. We do not have any intention to kill or
murder kung namatay na, ay after the fact ho iyon. Pero, kung maim."
sasabihin natin sa mga kabataan na: "Huwag ninyong gagawin iyong
hazing. Iyan ay kasalanan at kung mamatay diyan, mataas ang This is the lusot, Mr. President. They might as well have been
penalty sa inyo." charged therefore with the ordinary crime of homicide, mutilation,
etcetera, where the prosecution will have a difficulty proving the 1. That there is an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite
elements if they are separate offenses. for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or
organization;
x x x           x x x          x x x
2. That there must be a recruit, neophyte or applicant of the
SENATOR LINA. x x x fraternity, sorority or organization; and

I am very happy that the distinguished Minority Leader brought out 3. That the recruit, neophyte or applicant is placed in some
the idea of intent or whether it is mala in se or mala prohibita. There embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to
can be a radical amendment if that is the point that he wants to go to. do menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or activities or
otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological
suffering or injury.
If we agree on the concept, then, maybe, we can just make this a
special law on hazing. We will not include this anymore under the
Revised Penal Code. That is a possibility. I will not foreclose that From the said definition of hazing, it is apparent that there must be
suggestion, Mr. President.69 an initiation rite or practice performed by the fraternities, sororities or
organization. The law, however, did not limit the definition of these
groups to those formed within academic colleges and
[Emphases Supplied]
universities.74 In fact, the second paragraph of Section 1 provides
that the term "organization" shall include any club or the Armed
Having in mind the potential conflict between the proposed law and Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Philippine National Police (PNP),
the core principle of mala in se adhered to under the RPC, the Philippine Military Academy (PMA), or officer and cadet corp of the
Congress did not simply enact an amendment thereto. Instead, it Citizen's Military Training and Citizen's Army Training. Even the
created a special law on hazing, founded upon the principle of mala president, manager, director or other responsible officer of a
prohibita.70 In Vedana v. Valencia,71 the Court noted that in our corporation engaged in hazing as a requirement for employment are
nation's very recent history, the people had spoken, through the covered by the law.75 R.A. No. 8049 qualifies that the physical,
Congress, to deem conduct constitutive of hazing, an act previously mental and psychological testing and training procedure and
considered harmless by custom, as criminal. 72 The act of hazing itself practices to determine and enhance the physical, mental and
is not inherently immoral, but the law deems the same to be against psychological fitness of prospective regular members of the AFP and
public policy and must be prohibited. Accordingly, the existence of the PNP, as approved by the Secretary of National Defense and the
criminal intent is immaterial in the crime of hazing. Also, the defense National Police Commission, duly recommended by the Chief of Staff
of good faith cannot be raised in its prosecution.73 of the AFP and the Director General of the PNP, shall not be
considered as hazing.
Section 1 of R.A. No. 8049 defines hazing as an initiation rite or
practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a And not all forms of initiation rites are prohibited by the law. Section
fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the recruit, neophyte or 2 thereof provides that initiation rites of fraternities, sororities or
applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as organizations shall be allowed provided that the following requisites
forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or are met:
activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological
suffering or injury. From the said definition, the elements of the crime
of hazing can be determined:
 1. That the fraternity, sorority or organization has a prior The first class of principals would be the actual participants in the
written notice to the school authorities or head of hazing. If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of initiation
organization; rites suffers any physical injury or dies as a result thereof, the
officers and members of the fraternity, sorority or organization who
2. The said written notice must be secured at least seven (7) actually participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be liable
days before the conduct of such initiation; as principals. Interestingly, the presence of any person during the
hazing is prima facie evidence of actual participation, unless he
prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein. 76
3. That the written notice shall indicate:

The prescribed penalty on the principals depends on the extent of

a. The period of the initiation activities, which shall
injury inflicted to the victim.77 The penalties appear to be similar to
not exceed three (3) days;
that of homicide, serious physical injuries, less serious physical
injuries, and slight physical injuries under the RPC, 78 with the
b. The names of those to be subjected to such penalties for hazing increased one degree higher. Also, the law
activities; and provides several circumstances which would aggravate the
imposable penalty.79
c. An undertaking that no physical violence be
employed by anybody during such initiation rites. Curiously, although hazing has been defined as consisting of those
Section 3 of R.A. No. 8049 imposes an obligation to activities involving physical or psychological suffering or injury, the
the head of the school or organization or their penalties for hazing only covered the infliction of physical harm. At
representatives that they must assign at least two (2) best, the only psychological injury recognized would be causing
representatives, as the case may be, to be present insanity to the victim. Conversely, even if the victim only sustained
during these valid initiations. The duty of such physical injuries which did not incapacitate him, there is still a
representative ,is to see to it that no physical harm of prescribed penalty.80
any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit, neophyte or
applicant.
The second class of principals would be the officers, former officers,
or alumni of the organization, group, fraternity or sorority who
Noticeably, the law does not provide a penalty or sanction to actually planned the hazing.81 Although these planners were not
fraternities, sororities or organizations that fail to comply with the present when the acts constituting hazing were committed, they shall
notice requirements of Section 2. Also, the school and organization still be liable as principals. The provision took in consideration the
administrators do not have a clear liability for non-compliance with non-resident members of the organization, such as their former
Section 3. officers or alumni.

Any person who commits the crime of hazing shall be liable in The third class of principals would ht; officers or members of an
accordance with Section 4 of the law, which provides different organization group, fraternity or sorority who knowingly cooperated in
classes of persons who are held liable as principals and carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be present
accomplices. thereat.82 These officers or members are penalized, not because of
their direct participation in the infliction of harm, but due to their
indispensable cooperation in the crime by inducing the victim to If the victim suffers from serious physical injuries, but the initiator
attend the hazing. said, "Well, he allowed it upon himself. He consented to it." So, if we
allow that reasoning that sodomy was done with the consent of the
The next class of principals would be the fraternity or sorority's victim, then we would not have passed any law at all. There will be
adviser who was present when the acts constituting hazing were no significance if we pass this bill, because it will always be a
committed, and failed to take action to prevent them from defense that the victim allowed the infliction of pain or suffering. He
occurring.83 The liability of the adviser arises, not only from his mere accepted it as part of the initiation rites.
presence in the hazing, but also his failure to prevent the same.
But precisely, Mr. President that is one thing that we would want to
The last class of principals would be the parents of the officers or prohibit. That the defense of consent will not apply because the very
members of the fraternity, group, or organization. 84 The hazing must act of inflicting physical pain or psychological suffering is, by itself, a
be held in the home of one of the officers or members. The parents punishable act. The result of the act of hazing, like death or physical
must have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted in their homes injuries merely aggravates the act with higher penalties. But the
and failed to take any action to avoid the same from occurring. defense of consent is not going to nullify the criminal nature of the
act.
The law also provides for accomplices in the crime of hazing. The
school authorities, including faculty members, who consented to the So, if we accept the amendment that sodomy can only aggravate the
hazing or who have actual knowledge thereof, but failed to take any offense if it is committed without consent of the victim, then the
action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as whole foundation of this proposed law will collapse.
accomplices.85 Likewise, the owner of the place where the hazing
was conducted can also be an accomplice to the crime. 86 The owner SENATOR BIAZON. Thank you, Mr. President.
of the place shall be liable when he has actual knowledge of the
hazing conducted therein and he failed to take any steps to stop the SENATOR LINA. Thank you very much.
same. Recognizing the malum prohibitum characteristic of hazing,
the law provides that any person charged with the said crime shall THE PRESIDENT. Is there any objection to the committee
not be entitled to the mitigating circumstance that there was no amendment? (Silence.) The Chair hears none; the same is
intention to commit so grave a wrong. 87 Also, the framers of the law approved.88
intended that the consent of the victim shall not be a defense in
hazing. During the discussion of whether sodomy shall be included
as a punishable act under the law, the issue of consent was tackled: [Emphasis supplied]
SENATOR LINA x x x
Further, the law acknowledges that the offended party in the crime of
But sodomy in this case is connected with hazing, Mr. President. hazing can seek different courses of action. n '.'provides that the
Such that the act may even be entered into with consent. It is not responsible officials of the school or of the police, military or citizen's
only sodomy. The infliction of pain may be done with the consent of army training organization, may impose the appropriate
the neophyte. If the law is passed, that does not make the act of administrative sanctions on the person or the persons charged under
hazing not punishable because the neophyte accepted the infliction this provision even before their conviction. 89 Necessarily, the
of pain upon himself. offended party can file either administrative, civil, or criminal actions
against the offenders.90
The study of the provisions of R.A. No. 8049 shows that, on paper, it language and not necessarily in the language used in the statute but
is complete and robust in penalizing the crime of hazing. It was made in terms sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to
malum prohibitum to discount criminal intent and disallow the know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and
defense of good faith. It took into consideration the different aggravating circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment.
participants and contributors in the hazing activities. While not all
acts cited in the law are penalized, the penalties imposed therein It is evident that the Information need not use the exact language of
involve various and serious terms of imprisonment to discourage the statute in alleging the acts or omissions complained of as
would-be offenders. Indeed, the law against hazing is ideal and constituting the offense. The test is whether it enables a person of
profound. As to whether the law can be effectively implemented, the common understanding to know the charge against him, and the
Court begs to continue on the merits of the case. court to render judgment properly.92

The Information properly The Court agrees with the OSG that the "planned initiation rite" as
stated in the information included the act of inducing Villanueva to
charged the offense proved attend it. In ordinary parlance, a planned event can be understood to
have different phases. Likewise, the hazing activity had different
The petitioners claim that the amended ,information avers a criminal stages and the perpetrators had different roles therein, not solely
charge of hazing by actual participation, but the only offense proved inflicting physical injury to the neophyte. One of the roles of the
during the trial was hazing by inducement. Their1 contention must petitioners in the hazing activity was to induce Villanueva to be
fail. The Amended Information reads: present. Dungo and Sibal not only induced Villanueva to be present
at the resort, but they actually brought him there. They fulfilled their
roles in the planned hazing rite which eventually led to the death of
That on or about 2:30 in the early morning of January 14, 2006, at
Villanueva. The hazing would not have been accomplished were it
Villa Novaliches, Brgy. Pansol, Calamba City, Province of Laguna
not for the acts of the petitioners that induced the victim to be
and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the above-named
present.
accused, during a planned initiation rite and being then officers and
members of Alpha Phi Omega fraternity and present thereat, in
conspiracy with more or less twenty other members and officers, Secrecy and silence are common characterizations of the dynamics
whose identity is not yet known, did then and there willfully, of hazing.93 To require the prosecutor to indicate every step of the
unlawfully and feloniously assault and use personal violence upon planned initiation rite in the information at the inception of the
one MARLON VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte thereof and as criminal case, when details of the clandestine hazing are almost nil,
condition for his admission to the fraternity, thereby subjecting him to would be an arduous task, if not downright impossible. The law does
physical harm, resulting to his death, to the damage and prejudice of not require the impossible (lex non cognit ad impossibilia).
the heirs of the victim. CONTRARY TO LAW.91
The proper approach would be to require the prosecution to state
On the manner of how the Information should be worded, Section 9, every element of the crime of hazing, the offenders, and the
Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, is enlightening: accompanying circumstances in the planned initiation activity which
has been satisfied in the present case. Accordingly, the amended
information sufficiently informed the petitioners that they were being
Section 9. Cause of the accusation. The acts or omissions
criminally charged for their roles in the planned initiation rite.
complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise
Conspiracy of the SENATOR GUINGONA. The persons are present. First, would the
offenders was duly proven prosecution have to prove conspiracy? Second, would the
prosecution have to prove intent to kill or not?
The petitioners assail that the prosecution failed to establish the fact
of conspiracy. SENATOR LINA. No more. As to the second question, Mr. President,
if that occurs, there is no need to prove intent to kill.
The Court disagrees.
SENATOR GUINGONA. But the charge is murder.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to SENATOR LINA. That is why I said that it should not be murder. It
commit it. To determine conspiracy, there must be a common design should be hazing, Mr. President.98
to commit a felony.94 The overt act or acts of the accused may
consist of active participation in the actual commission of the crime The Court does not categorically agree that, under R.A. No. 8049,
itself or may consist of moral assistance to his co-conspirators by the prosecution need not prove conspiracy. Jurisprudence dictates
moving them to execute or implement the criminal plan. 95 that conspiracy must be established, not by conjectures, but by
positive and conclusive evidence. Conspiracy transcends mere
In conspiracy, it need not be shown that the parties actually came companionship and mere presence at the scene of the crime does
together and agreed in express terms to enter into and pursue a not in itself amount to conspiracy. Even knowledge, acquiescence in
common design. The assent of the minds may be and, from the or agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute one as a
secrecy of the crime, usually inferred from proof of facts and party to a conspiracy, absent any active participation in the
circumstances which, taken together, indicate that they are parts of commission of the crime with a view to the furtherance of the
some complete whole.96 Responsibility of a conspirator is not common design and purpose.99
confined to the accomplishment of a particular purpose of conspiracy
but extends to collateral acts and offenses incident to and growing R.A. No. 8049, nevertheless, presents a novel provision that
out of the purpose intended.97 introduces a disputable presumption of actual participation; and
which modifies the concept of conspiracy. Section 4, paragraph 6
The lawmakers deliberated on whether the prosecution was still thereof provides that the presence of any person during the hazing is
obliged to prove the conspiracy between the offenders under R.A. prima facie evidence of participation as principal, unless he
8049, to wit: prevented the commission of the punishable acts. This provision is
unique because a disputable presumption arises from the mere
SENATOR GUINGONA. Mr. President, assuming there was a group presence of the offender during the hazing, which can be rebutted by
that initiated and a person died. The charge is murder. My question proving that the accused took steps to prevent the commission of the
is: Under this bill if it becomes a law, would the prosecution have to hazing.
prove conspiracy or not anymore?
The petitioners attempted to attack the constitutionality of Section 4
SENATOR LINA. Mr. President, if the person is present during of R.A. No. 8049 before the CA, hut did not succeed. "[A] finding of
hazing x x x prima facie evidence x x x does not shatter the presumptive
innocence the accused enjoys because, before prima facie evidence
arises, certain facts have still to be proved; the trial court cannot
depend alone on such evidence, because precisely, it is merely Q: Where did they come from, did they come out from the resort?
prima facie. It must still satisfy that the accused is guilty beyond Where did this 3 people or this group of people coming from?
reasonable doubt of the offense charged. Neither can it rely on the
weak defense the latter may adduce."100 A: Inside the resort, sir.

Penal laws which feature prima facie evidence by disputable Q: And around what time was this?
presumptions against the offenders are not new, and can be
observed in the following: (1) the possession of drug paraphernalia A: Around 9:00, sir.
gives rise to prima facie evidence of the use of dangerous drug; 101 (2)
the dishonor of the check for insufficient funds is prima facie
evidence of knowledge of such insufficiency of funds or credit; 102 and Q: And what did they do if any if they came out of the resort?
(3) the possession of any good which has been the subject of
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of fencing. 103 A: They went to my store, sir.

Verily, the disputable presumption under R.A. No. 8049 can be xxxx
related to the conspiracy in the crime of hazing. The common design
of offenders is to haze the victim. Some of the overt acts that could Q: Did you have any other visitors to your store that night?
be committed by the offenders would be to (1) plan the hazing
activity as a requirement of the victim's initiation to the fraternity; (2) xxxx
induce the victim to attend the hazing; and (3) actually participate in
the infliction of physical injuries.
A: "Meron po".
In this case, there was prima facie evidence of the petitioners'
Q: Who were these visitors?
participation in the hazing because of their presence in the venue. As
correctly held by the RTC, the presence of Dungo and Sibal during
the hazing at Villa Novaliches Resort was established by the A: I don't know their names but I recognize their faces, sir.
testimony of Ignacio. She testified that she saw Sibal emerge from
the resort and approach her store, to wit: Q: If I show you pictures of these people, will you be able to identify
them before this Court.
MR. DIMACULANGAN
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And how many persons from this group did you see again?
xxxx
WITNESS
Q: Mrs. Ignacio, I am showing you this picture of persons marked as
A: Three (3), sir. Exhibit "L" in the Pre-Trial, can you please look over this document
carefully and see if any of the persons whom you said visited your
store is here?
xxxx bumaba siya tapos iyong mga kasamahan nya sa likod nagbaba-an
din, iyon po nagbati-an po sila."
A: "Siya rin po."
Q: And from these greeting, how could you identify these people?
COURT:
A: "Ngayon ko lang po napag masdan ang taong iyon, hindi ko po
Make it of record that the witness pinpointed to the first picture alam na akusado po sa kabila iyon."
appearing on the left picture on the first row.
Q: And who was that person?
xxxx
A: "Siya po, iyon po."
ATIY. PAMAOS:
Q: Who are you pointing to?
For the record, your Honor, we manifest that the picture and the
name pointed by the witness has been previously marked as Exhibit A: "Iyon pong naka-dilaw na ... " (Witness pointing to Dandy Dungo)
"L-3" and previously admitted by the defense as referring to Gregorio
Sibal, Jr., accused in this case…104 Q: So, are you telling the Court that this person you positively saw
seated beside the driver came out and subsequently embraced and
Ignacio, also positively identified Dungo as among the guests of Villa shook hands with the other people from the jeepney, is that your
Novaliches Resort on the night of the hazing, to wit: testimony?

COURT A: Yes, your Honor.105

Q: xx x Now, when you say other people you could identify who are The testimony of Ignacio was direct and straightforward. Her
not in the pictures then how would you know that these people are testimony was given great weight because she was a disinterested
indeed those people you could identify? and credible witness. The prosecution indubitably established the
presence of Dungo and Sibal during the hazing. Such gave rise to
WITNESS the prima facie evidence of their actual participation in the hazing of
Villanueva. They were given an opportunity to rebut and overcome
the prima facie evidence of the prosecution by proving that they
A: "Iyon pong ... di ba po nagkuwento ako na dumating sila tapos
prevented the commission of the hazing, yet they failed to do so.
nag shake hands at saka iyong nagyakapan po ... "

Because of the uncontroverted prima facie evidence against the

Q: And what will be the significance of the alleged embrace and
petitioners, it was shown that they performed an overt act in the
shake hands for you to say that you could identify those people?
furtherance of the criminal design of hazing. Not only did they induce
the victim to attend the hazing activity, the petitioners also actually
A: "Hindi po. Noong dumating po sila nasa isang jeep, meron pong participated in it based on the prima facie evidence. These acts are
lalaki doon sa may tabi ng driver bumaba siya tapos po noong sufficient to establish their roles in the conspiracy of hazing.
Hence, generally, mere presence at the scene of the crime does not organizations, are secretive in nature and their members are
in itself amount to conspiracy. 106 Exceptionally, under R.A. No. 8049, reluctant to give any information regarding initiation rites. 110 The
the participation of the offenders in the criminal conspiracy can be silence is only broken after someone has been injured so severely
proven by the prima facie evidence due to their presence during the that medical attention is required. It is only at this point that the
hazing, unless they prevented the commission of the acts therein. secret is revealed and the activities become public. 111 Bearing in
mind the concealment of hazing, it is only logical and proper for the
The guilt of the prosecution to resort to the presentation of circumstantial evidence to
petitioners was proven prove it.
beyond reasonable doubt
The rules on evidence and precedents to sustain the conviction of an
Aside from inducing Villanueva to attend the initiation rites and their accused through circumstantial evidence require the existence of the
presence during the hazing, the petitioners? guilt was proven beyond following requisites: (1) there are more than one circumstance; (2)
reasonable doubt by the sequence of circumstantial evidence the inference must be based on proven facts; and (3) the
presented by the prosecution. Their involvement in the hazing of combination of all circumstances produces a conviction beyond
Villanueva is not merely based on prima facie evidence but was also reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused. 112 To justify a conviction
established by circumstantial evidence. upon circumstantial evidence, the combination of circumstances
must be such as to leave no reasonable doubt in the mind as to the
criminal liability of the accused. Jurisprudence requires that the
In considering a criminal case, it is critical to start with the law's own
circumstances must be established to form an unbroken chain of
starting perspective on the status of the accused - in all criminal
events leading to one fair reasonable conclusion pointing to the
prosecutions, he is presumed innocent of the charge laid unless the
accused, to the exclusion of all others, as the author of the crime. 113
contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt. 107 In criminal law, proof
beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such degree of proof that
produces absolute certainty. Only moral certainty is required or that The CA meticulously wrote in detail the unbroken chain of
degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced circumstantial evidence which established the petitioners' gult in the
mind.108 death of Villanueva as follows:

While it is established that nothing less than proof beyond 1. Marlon Villanueva is a neophyte of Alpha Phi Omega, as
reasonable doubt is required for a conviction, this exacting standard testified by his roommate Joey Atienza.
does not preclude resort to circumstantial evidence when direct
evidence is not available. Direct evidence is not a condition sine qua 2. At around 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon of January 13,
non to prove the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable doubt. For in 2006, Sunga was staying at their tambayan, talking to her
the absence of direct evidence, the prosecution may resort to organization mates. Three men were seated two meters way
adducing circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden. Crimes are from her. She identified two of the men as appellants Sibal
usually committed in secret and under conditions where concealment and Dungo, while she did not know the third man. The three
is highly probable. If direct evidence is insisted on under all men were wearing black shirts with the seal of the Alpha Phi
circumstances, the prosecution of vicious felons who commit heinous Omega.
crimes in secret or secluded places will be hard, if not impossible, to
prove.109 Needless to state, the crime of hazing is shrouded in 3. Later at 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon, two more men
secrecy. Fraternities and sororities, especially the Greek coming from the entomology wing arrived and approached
the three men. Among the men who just arrived was the morning of January 14, 2006, he was waiting for passengers
victim, Marlon Villanueva. One of the men wearing black at the corner of Villa Novaliches Resort when a man
APO shirts handed over to the two fraternity neophytes approached him and told him that someone inside the resort
some money and told the men "Mamalengke na kayo." He needed a ride. Magat then went to the resort and asked the
later took back the money and said, "Huwag na, kami na two (2) men standing by the gate who will be riding his
lang." tricycle.

4. One of the men wearing a black APO shirt, who was later 9. The four (4) men boarded his tricycle but Magat noticed
identified as appellant Dungo, stood up and asked Marlon if that when he touched the body of the man who was being
the latter already reported to him, and asked him why he did carried, it felt cold. The said man looked very weak like a
not report to him when he was just at the tambayan. Dungo vegetable.
then continuously punched the victim on his arm. This went
on for five minutes. Marlon just kept quiet with his head 10. Seferino Espina y Jabay testified that he worked as a
bowed down. Fifteen minutes later, the men left going security guard at the J.P. Rizal Hospital and was assigned at
towards the Entomology wing. the emergency room. At around 3:00 o'clock in the early
morning of January 14, 2006, he was with another security
5. The deceased Marlon Villanueva was 'last seen alive by guard, Abelardo Natividad and hospital helper Danilo Glindo
Joey Atienza at 7:00 in the evening of 13 January 2006, from a.k.a. Gringo, when a tricycle arrived at the emergency room
whom he borrowed the shoes he wore at the initiation right containing four (4) passengers, excluding the driver. He was
[sic]. Marlon told Joey that it was his "finals" night. an arm's length away from said tricycle. He identified two of
the passengers thereof as appellants Dungo and Sibal.
6. On January 13, 2006 at around 8:30 to 9:00 o'clock in the Espina said he and Glinda helped the passengers unload a
evening, Susan Ignacio saw more than twenty (20) persons body inside the tricycle and brought it to the emergency
arrive at the Villa Novaliches Resort onboard a room.
jeepney.1âwphi1 She estimated the ages of these persons
to be between 20 to 30 years old. Three (3) persons riding a 11. Afterwards, Espina asked the two meq for identification
single motorcycle likewise arrived at the resort. cards. The latter replied that they did not bring with them any
I.D. or wallet.1âwphi1 Instead of giving their true names, the
7. Ignacio saw about fifteen (15) persons gather on top of appellants listed down their names in the hospital logbook as
the terrace at the resort who looked like they were praying. Brandon Gonzales y Lanzon and Jericho Paril y Rivera.
Later that evening, at least three (3) of these persons went Espina then told the two men not to leave, not telling them
to her store to buy some items. She did not know their that they secretly called the police to report the incident
names but could identity [sic] their faces. After she was which was their standard operating procedure when a dead
shown colored photographs, she pointed to the man later body was brought to the hospital.
identified as Herald Christopher Braseros. She also pointed
out the man later identified as Gregorio Sibal, Jr. 12. Dr. Ramon Masilungan, who was then the attending
physician at the emergency room, observed that Marlon was
8. Donato Magat, a tricycle driver plying the route of Pansol, motionless, had no heartbeat and already cyanotic.
Calamba City, testified that around 3:00 o'clock in the
 13. Dr. Masilungan tried to revive Marlon for about 15 to 20 weakest of all defenses, because they are easy to concoct and
minutes. However, the latter did not respond to resuscitation fabricate.115 As properly held by the RTC, these defenses cannot
and was pronounced dead. Dr. Masilungan noticed a big prevail over the positive and unequivocal identification of the
contusion hematoma on the left side of the victim's face and petitioners by prosecution witnesses Sunga and Ignacio. The
several injuries on his arms and legs. He further attested that testimonies of the defense witnesses also lacked credibility and
Marlon's face was already cyanotic. reliability. The corroboration of defense witness Rivera was suspect
because she was the girlfriend of Dungo, and it was only logical and
14. When Dr. Masilungan pulled down Marlon's pants, he emotional that she would stand by the man she loved and cared for.
saw a large contusion on both legs which extended from the The testimonies of their fellow fraternity brothers, likewise, do not
upper portion of his thigh down to the couplexial portion or hold much weight because they had so much at stake in the
the back of the knee. outcome of the case. Stated differently, the petitioners did not
present credible and. disinterested witnesses to substantiate their
defenses of denial and alibi.
15. Due to the nature, extent and location of Marlon's
injuries, Dr. Masilungan opined that he was a victim of
hazing. Dr. Masilungan is familiar with hazing injuries, having After a careful review of the records, the Court agrees with the CA
undergone hazing when he was a student and also because and the R TC that the circumstantial evidence presented by the
of his experience treating victims of hazing incidents. prosecution was overwhelming enough to establish the guilt of the
petitioners beyond a reasonable doubt. The unbroken chain of
events laid down by the CA leaves us no other conclusion other than
16. Dr. Roy Camarillo, Medico-Legal Officer of the PNP
the petitioners' participation in the hazing. They took part in the
Crime Laboratory in Region IV, Camp Vicente Lim,
hazing and, together; with their fellow fraternity officers and
Canlubang, Calamba City, testified that he performed an
members, inflicted physical injuries to Villanueva as a requirement of
autopsy on the cadaver of the victim on January 14j 2006;
his initiation to the fraternity. The physical injuries eventually took a
that the victim's cause of death was blunt head trauma. From
toll on the body of the victim, which led to his death. Another young
1999 to 2006, he was able to conduct post-mortem
life lost.
examination of the two (2) persons whose deaths were
attributed to hazing. These two (2) persons sustained
multiple contusions and injuries on different parts of their With the fact of hazing, the identity ,of the petitioners, and their
body, particularly on the buttocks, on both upper and lower participation therein duly proven, the moral certainty that produces
extremities. Both persons died of brain hemorrhage. conviction in an unprejudiced mind has been satisfied.
Correlating these two cases to the injuries found on the
victim's body, Dr. Camarillo attested that the victim, Marlon Final Note
Villanueva, sustained similar injuries to those two (2)
persons. Based on the presence of multiple injuries and
contusions on his body, he opined that these injuries were
hazing-related.114

Petitioners Dungo and Sibal, on the other hand, presented the

defense of denial and alibi. These defenses, however, must fail.
Time and time again, this Court has ruled that denial and alibi are the
Hazing has been a phenomenon that has beleaguered the country's WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The April 26, 2013 Decision
educational institutions and communities. News of young men and the October 8, 2013 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in
beaten to death as part of fraternities' violent initiation rites CAG.R. CR-H.C. No. 05046 are hereby AFFIRMED in toto. Let
supposedly to seal fraternal bond has sent disturbing waves to copies of this Decision be furnished to the Secretary of the
lawmakers. Hence, R.A. No. 8049 was signed into to law on June 7, Department of Justice as guidance for the proper implementation
1995. Doubts on the effectiveness of the law were raised. The Court, and prosecution of violators of R.A. No. 8049; and to the Senate
however, scrutinized its provisions and it is convinced that the law is President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives for
rigorous in penalizing the crime of hazing. possible consideration of the amendment of the Anti-Hazing Law to
include the penalty for noncompliance with its Section 2 and 3, and
Hopefully, the present case will serve as a guide to the bench and the :penalty for the psychological harms to the surviving victims of
the bar on the application of R.A. No. 8049. Through careful case- hazing.
build up and proper presentation of evidence before the court, it is
not impossible for the exalted constitutional presumption of SO ORDERED.
innocence of the accused to be overcome and his guilt for the crime
of hazing be proven beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution must SECOND DIVISION
bear in mind the secretive nature of hazing, and carefully weave its
chain of circumstantial evidence. Likewise, the defense must present G.R. No. 121828               June 27, 2003
a genuine defense and substantiate the same through credible and
reliable witnesses. The counsels of both parties must also consider
hazing as a malum prohibitum crime and the law's distinctive PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee,
provisions. vs.
EDMAR AGUILOS, ODILON LAGLIBA Y ABREGON and RENE
GAYOT PILOLA, accused, RENE GAYOT PILOLA, Appellant.
While the Court finds R.A. No. 8049 adequate to deter and prosecute
hazing, the law is far from perfect. In Villareal v. People, 116 the Court
suggested that the fact of intoxication and the presence of non- DECISION
resident or alumni fraternity members during hazing should be
considered as aggravating circumstances that would increase the CALLEJO, SR., J.:
applicable penalties. Equally, based on the discussion earlier, this
Court suggests some further amendments to the law. First, there Before us is the appeal of appellant Rene Gayot Pilola for the
should be a penalty or liability for noncompliance with Section 2, or reversal of the Decision1 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig
the written notice requirement, and with Section 3, or the City, Branch 164, convicting him of murder, sentencing him to suffer
representation requirement. Second, the penalties under Section 4 reclusion perpetua and ordering him to indemnify the heirs of the
should also consider the psychological harm done to the victim of victim Joselito Capa y Rulloda in the amount of ₱50,000 for the
hazing. With these additional inputs on R.A. No. 8049, the movement latter’s death.
against hazing can be invigorated. R.A. No. 8049 is a democratic
response to the uproar against hazing. It demonstrates that there The Indictment
must, and should, be another way of fostering brotherhood, other
than through the culture of violence and suffering. The senseless
deaths of these young men shall never be forgotten, for justice is the
spark that lights the candles of their graves.
On June 7, 1998, Edmar Aguilos, Odilon Lagliba y Abregon and Edmar and Odilon left the store. Joselito and Julian were also about
appellant Rene Gayot Pilola were charged with murder in an to leave, when Edmar and Odilon returned, blocking their way.
Information which reads: Edmar took off his eyeglasses and punched Julian in the face. Elisa
shouted: "Tama na. Tama na." Edmar and Julian ignored her and
That on or about the 5th day of February, 1988 in the Municipality of traded fist blows until they reached Aling Sotera’s store at the end of
Mandaluyong, Metro Manila, Philippines, a place within the the street, about twelve to fifteen meters away from Elisa’s store. For
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, his part, Odilon positioned himself on top of a pile of hollow blocks
conspiring and confederating together with one Ronnie Diamante and watched as Edmar and Julian swapped punches. Joselito tried
who is still at-large and no fixed address and mutually helping and to placate the protagonists to no avail. Joselito’s intervention
aiding with one another, armed with double-bladed knives and a bolo apparently did not sit well with Odilon. He pulled out his knife with his
and with intent to kill, treachery and taking advantage of superior right hand and stepped down from his perch. He placed his left arm
strength, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously around Joselito’s neck, and stabbed the latter. Ronnie and the
attack, assault hack and stab one Joselito Capa y Rulloda, as a appellant, who were across the street, saw their gangmate Odilon
result of which the latter sustained hack and stab wounds on the stabbing the victim and decided to join the fray. They pulled out their
different parts of his body, which directly caused his death. knives, rushed to the scene and stabbed Joselito. Elisa could not tell
how many times the victim was stabbed or what parts of his body
were hit by whom. The victim fell in the canal. Odilon and the
CONTRARY TO LAW.2
appellant fled, while Ronnie went after Julian and tried to stab him.
Julian ran for dear life. When he noticed that Ronnie was no longer
Of the three accused, Odilon Lagliba was the first to be arrested 3 and running after him, Julian stopped at E. Rodriguez Road and looked
tried, and subsequently convicted of murder. 4 The decision of the trial back. He saw Ronnie pick up a piece of hollow block and with it
court became final and executory. Accused Edmar Aguilos remains bashed Joselito’s head. Not content, Ronnie got a piece of broken
at large while accused Ronnie Diamante reportedly died a month bottle and struck Joselito once more. Ronnie then fled from the
after the incident. Meanwhile, herein appellant Rene Gayot Pilola scene. Joselito died on the spot. Elisa rushed to Joselito’s house and
was arrested. He was arraigned on March 9, 1994, assisted by informed his wife and brother of the incident.7
counsel, and pleaded not guilty to the charge. 5 Thereafter, trial of the
case ensued.
The next day, Dr. Bienvenido Muñoz, Supervising Medico-Legal
Officer of the National Bureau of Investigation, conducted an autopsy
The Evidence of the Prosecution6 on the cadaver of Joselito and prepared Autopsy Report No. N-88-
375,8 with the following findings:
On February 5, 1988, at around 11:30 p.m., Elisa Rolan was inside
their store at 613 Nueve de Pebrero Street, Mandaluyong City, POSTMORTEM FINDINGS
waiting for her husband to arrive. Joselito Capa and Julian Azul, Jr.
were drinking beer. Edmar Aguilos and Odilon Lagliba arrived at the
Pallor, conjunctivae and integument, marked and generalized.
store. Joselito and Julian invited them to join their drinking spree,
and although already inebriated, the two newcomers obliged. In the
course of their drinking, the conversation turned into a heated Contused abrasions: temple, right, 3.0 x 3.0 cm.; mandibular region,
argument. Edmar nettled Julian, and the latter was peeved. An right, 2.0 x 8.0 cm.; back, suprascapular region, left, 3.0 x 4.0 cm.;
altercation between the two ensued. Elisa pacified the protagonists deltoid region, right, 1.0 x 3.0 cm.
and advised them to go home as she was already going to close up.
Lacerated wound, scalp, occipital region, 4.0 cm. 5. Elliptical, 1.3 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
clean-cut, one extremity is sharp and the other is blunt;
Incised wounds: forehead, right side, 5.5 cm.; arm, left, upper third, located at the lateral chest wall, level of 7 th intercostal space,
posterior aspect, 1.5 cm. left, 16.0 cm. from anterior median line; directed backward,
upward and medially, into the left thoracic cavity and then
penetrating the lower lobe of left lung with an approximately
Stab wounds:
depth of 10.0 cm.;
1. Elliptical, 1.8 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
6. Elliptical, 4.0 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
clean-cut, medial extremity is sharp, lateral extremity is
clean-cut, one extremity is sharp and the other is blunt;
blunt; located at the anterior chest wall, level of 3rd
located at the lumbar region, left, 14.0 cm. from anterior
intercostal space, right, 5.0 cm. from anterior median line;
median line; directed backward, upward and medially, into
directed backward, upward and medially, non-penetrating,
the abdominal cavity and then penetrating ileum;
with an approximate depth of 3.0 cm.;

7. Elliptical, 1.5 cm., oriented almost vertically, edges are

2. Elliptical, 1.5 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
clean-cut, upper extremity is sharp, lower extremity is blunt;
clean-cut, one extremity is sharp and the other is blunt;
located at the chest, lateral, level of 9th intercostal space,
located at the antero-lateral aspect of chest, level of 3rd
left; 14.0 cm. from posterior median line; directed forward,
intercostal space, left, 3.0 cm. from anterior median line;
upward and medially, non-penetrating with an approximate
directed backward, downward and medially, into the left
depth of 4.0 cm.;
thoracic cavity, penetrating the left ventricle of the heart with
an approximate depth of 10.0 cm.;
8. Elliptical, 2.0 cm., oriented almost vertically, edges are
clean-cut, upper extremity is blunt, lower extremity is sharp;
3. Elliptical, 3.0 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
located at the abdomen, postero-lateral aspect, 15.0 cm.
clean-cut, one extremity is sharp and the other is blunt;
from posterior median line; directed forward, upward and
located at the antero-lateral aspect of chest, level of 4th
laterally, into the abdominal cavity and then perforating the
intercostal space, 12.0 cm. from anterior median line;
spleen and pancreas with an approximate depth of 13.0 cm.;
directed backward, downward and medially, penetrating
upper lobe of left lung with an approximate depth of 9.0 cm.;
9. Elliptical, 5.0 cm., oriented almost vertically, edges are
clean-cut, upper extremity is blunt, lower extremity is sharp;
4. Elliptical, 2.0 cm., oriented almost horizontally, edges are
located at the left arm, upper third, anterior; directed
clean-cut, one extremity is sharp and the other is blunt;
backward, downward and medially, involving skin and
located at the antero-lateral aspect of chest, level of 5th
underlying soft tissues with an approximate depth of 6.0 cm.;
intercostal space, left, 15.0 cm. from anterior median line;
directed backward, downward and medially, penetrating the
left thoracic cavity and then lower lobe of left lung and then 10. Elliptical, 2.3 cm., oriented almost vertically, edges are
penetrating the left ventricle of the heart with an approximate clean-cut, upper extremity is sharp, lower extremity is blunt;
depth of 11.0 cm.; located at the left forearm, upper third, anterior; directed
backward, upward and medially and communicating with
another wound, arm, left, medial aspect, 2.0 cm.;
 11. Elliptical, 2.0 cm., oriented almost vertically, edges are Agripina Gloria, a female security guard residing at Block 30, Nueve
clean-cut, upper extremity blunt, lower extremity, sharp; de Pebrero, 612, Int. 4, Allison St., Mandaluyong City, testified that
located at the left arm, lower third, posterior aspect, directed on February 5, 1988 at around 11:00 p.m., she heard a commotion
forward, downward and medially, communicating with outside. Momentarily, she saw Ronnie rush into the kitchen of the
another wound, arm, left, lower third, posterior aspect, 1.5 house of her niece Teresita; he took a knife and run towards Nueve
cm. de Pebrero Street where Edmar and Julian were fighting. She then
followed Ronnie and saw Joselito trying to pacify the protagonists.
Hemothorax, left – 900 c.c. Ronnie grabbed Joselito and instantly stabbed the latter, who for a
while retreated and fell down the canal. Not content, Ronnie
repeatedly stabbed Joselito. Thereafter, Ronnie ran towards the
Hemopericardium – 300 c.c.
direction of the mental hospital. Agripina did not see Odilon or the
appellant anywhere within the vicinity of the incident. 11
Hemoperitoneum – 750 c.c.
On May 3, 1995, the trial court rendered its assailed decision, the
Brain and other visceral organs, pale. dispositive portion of which reads, to wit:

Stomach-filled with rice and other food particles. WHEREFORE, this Court finds RENE GAYOT PILOLA of 606 Nueve
de Febrero Street, Mandaluyong City, GUILTY beyond reasonable
CAUSE OF DEATH: Multiple stab wounds. doubt of Murder punished under Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code, and there being no mitigating nor aggravating circumstances,
The Evidence of the Appellant he is hereby sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Pilola is hereby
ordered to indemnify the heirs of deceased Joselito Capa alias
The appellant denied stabbing the victim and interposed the defense Jessie in the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (₱50,000.00) as
of alibi. He testified that at around 11:00 p.m. of February 5, 1988, he indemnity for his death jointly and solidarily with Odilon Lagliba who
was in the house of his cousin, Julian Cadion, at 606 Nueve de was earlier convicted herein. With cost against the accused. 12
Pebrero Street, Mandaluyong City. He suddenly heard a commotion
coming from outside. Julian rushed out of the house to find out what In the case at bar, the appellant assails the decision of the trial court
was going on. The appellant remained inside the house because he contending that:
was suffering from ulcer and was experiencing excessive pain in his
stomach. The following morning, the appellant learned from their I
neighbor, Elisa Rolan, that Joselito had been stabbed to death. The
appellant did not bother to ask who was responsible for the THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THERE WAS
stabbing.9 CONSPIRACY ANENT THE ASSAILED INCIDENT.

Julian alias "Buboy" Cadion corroborated the appellant’s testimony. II

He testified that the appellant was in their house on the night of
February 5, 1988, and was suffering from ulcer. The appellant stayed
home on the night of the incident.10
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO THE Q Could you tell the court what instrument could have been used by
UNRELIABLE AND INCONSISTENT TESTIMONY OF the perpetrator in inflicting those two incise wounds?
PROSECUTION WITNESS ELISA ROLAN AND IN SETTING ASIDE
THE EVIDENCE PROFFERED BY ACCUSED-APPELLANT. A Those incise wounds were caused by a sharp instrument like a
knife or any similar instrument.
III
…
THE TRIAL COURT MANIFESTLY ERRED IN CONVICTING
ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE THE Q Now you also found out from the body of the victim eleven stab
FACT THAT HIS GUILT WAS NOT PROVED BEYOND wounds?
REASONABLE DOUBT.13
A Yes, sir.
The appellant avers that Elisa is not a credible witness and her
testimony is barren of probative weight. This is so because she Q Now, tell the court in which part of the body of the victim where
contradicted herself when she testified on direct examination that these eleven stab wounds [are] located?
Ronnie struck the head of the victim with a hollow block. However,
on cross-examination, she stated that it was Edmar who struck the
victim. The inconsistency in Elisa’s testimony impaired her credibility. A Shall I go one by one, all the eleven stab wounds?

The contention of the appellant does not hold water. Q All the eleven stab wounds?

First. The identity of the person who hit the victim with a hollow block A One stab wound was located at the front portion of the chest, right
is of de minimis importance. The victim died because of multiple side. Another stab wound was located also on the chest left side,
wounds. The appellant is charged with murder for the killing of the another stab wound was located at the antero lateral aspect, it’s the
victim with a knife, in conspiracy with the other accused. front of the chest almost to the side. And also another one, also at
the chest, another stab wound was at the left side of the chest and
another one was at the lumbar region of the abdomen left side or
Second. The perceived inconsistency in Elisa’s account of events is where the left kidney is located, lumbar area. Another one at the side
a minor and collateral detail that does not affect the substance of her of the chest, left side of the chest. Another stab wound in the
testimony, as it even serves to strengthen rather than destroy her abdomen, another stab wound at the left arm. Another one at the left
credibility.14 forearm and the last one in the autopsy report is located at the left
arm. These are all the eleven stab wounds sustained by the victim.
Third. Elisa has been consistent in her testimony that the appellant
was one of the men who stabbed the victim, the others being Ronnie …
and Odilon. Elisa’s testimony is corroborated by the autopsy report of
Dr. Bienvenido Muñoz and his testimony that the victim sustained
eleven stab wounds. The doctor testified that there were two or more A The instrument used was a sharp pointed edge or a single bladed
assailants: instrument like a knife, kitchen knife, balisong or any similar
instrument.
Q Considering the number of stab wounds, doctor, will you tell us only a chance encounter between the victim, the appellant and his
whether there were several assailants? co-accused. In the absence of a conspiracy, the appellant cannot be
held liable as a principal by direct participation. Elisa could not
A In my opinion, there were more than one assailants (sic) here categorically and positively assert as to what part of the victim’s body
because of the presence of different types of stab wounds and was hit by whom, and how many times the victim was stabbed by the
lacerated wounds. This lacerated wound could not have been appellant. He asserts that he is merely an accomplice and not a
inflicted by the one holding the one which inflicted the instrument . . principal by direct participation.
(discontinued) which inflicted the stab wounds.
We are not persuaded by the ruminations of the appellant.
Q So there could have been two or three assailants?
There is conspiracy when two or more persons agree to commit a
A More than one.15 felony and decide to commit it. 18 Conspiracy as a mode of incurring
criminal liability must be proved separately from and with the same
quantum of proof as the crime itself. Conspiracy need not be proven
The physical evidence is a mute but eloquent manifestation of the
by direct evidence. After all, secrecy and concealment are essential
veracity of Elisa’s testimony.16
features of a successful conspiracy. It may be inferred from the
conduct of the accused before, during and after the commission of
Fourth. Even the appellant himself declared on the witness stand the crime, showing that they had acted with a common purpose and
that he could not think of any reason why Elisa pointed to him as one design.19 Conspiracy may be implied if it is proved that two or more
of the assailants. In a litany of cases, we have ruled that when there persons aimed by their acts towards the accomplishment of the
is no showing of any improper motive on the part of a witness to same unlawful object, each doing a part so that their combined acts,
testify falsely against the accused or to falsely implicate the latter in though apparently independent of each other, were, in fact,
the commission of the crime, as in the case at bar, the logical connected and cooperative, indicating a closeness of personal
conclusion is that no such improper motive exists, and that the association and a concurrence of sentiment. 20 There may be
testimony is worthy of full faith and credence.17 conspiracy even if an offender does not know the identities of the
other offenders,21 and even though he is not aware of all the details
Fifth. The trial court gave credence and full probative weight to of the plan of operation or was not in on the scheme from the
Elisa’s testimony. Case law has it that the trial court’s calibration of beginning.22 One need only to knowingly contribute his efforts in
the testimonial evidence of the parties, its assessment of the furtherance of it.23 One who joins a criminal conspiracy in effect
credibility of witnesses and the probative weight thereof is given high adopts as his own the criminal designs of his co-conspirators. If
respect, if not conclusive effect, by the appellate court. conspiracy is established, all the conspirators are liable as co-
principals regardless of the manner and extent of their participation
The appellant argues that the prosecution failed to prove that he since in contemplation of law, the act of one would be the act of
conspired with Ronnie and Odilon in stabbing the victim to death. He all.24 Each of the conspirators is the agent of all the others. 25
contends that for one to be a conspirator, his participation in the
criminal resolution of another must either precede or be concurrent To hold an accused guilty as a co-principal by reason of conspiracy,
with the criminal acts. He asserts that even if it were true that he was he must be shown to have performed an overt act in pursuance or
present at the situs criminis and that he stabbed the victim, it was furtherance of the conspiracy.26 The mere presence of an accused at
Odilon who had already decided, and in fact fatally stabbed the the situs of the crime will not suffice; mere knowledge, acquiescence
victim. He could not have conspired with Odilon as the incident was or approval of the act without cooperation or agreement to cooperate
on the part of the accused is not enough to make him a party to a latter in his purpose; (b) the performance of previous or simultaneous
conspiracy. There must be intentional participation in the transaction acts that are not indispensable to the commission of the
with a view to the furtherance of the common design and crime.31 Accomplices come to know about the criminal resolution of
purpose.27 Conspiracy to exist does not require an agreement for an the principal by direct participation after the principal has reached the
appreciable period prior to the occurrence. From the legal decision to commit the felony and only then does the accomplice
standpoint, conspiracy exists if, at the time of the commission of the agree to cooperate in its execution. Accomplices do not decide
offense, the accused had the same purpose and were united in its whether the crime should be committed; they merely assent to the
execution.28 As a rule, the concurrence of wills, which is the essence plan of the principal by direct participation and cooperate in its
of conspiracy, may be deduced from the evidence of facts and accomplishment.32 However, where one cooperates in the
circumstances, which taken together, indicate that the parties commission of the crime by performing overt acts which by
cooperated and labored to the same end.29 themselves are acts of execution, he is a principal by direct
participation, and not merely an accomplice.33
Even if two or more offenders do not conspire to commit homicide or
murder, they may be held criminally liable as principals by direct In this case, Odilon all by himself initially decided to stab the victim.
participation if they perform overt acts which mediately or The appellant and Ronnie were on the side of the street. However,
immediately cause or accelerate the death of the victim, applying while Odilon was stabbing the victim, the appellant and Ronnie
Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code: agreed to join in; they rushed to the scene and also stabbed the
victim with their respective knives. The three men simultaneously
Art. 4. Criminal liability. – Criminal liability shall be incurred: stabbed the hapless victim. Odilon and the appellant fled from the
scene together, while Ronnie went after Julian. When he failed to
overtake and collar Julian, Ronnie returned to where Joselito fell and
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful
hit him with a hollow block and a broken bottle. Ronnie then hurriedly
act done be different from that which he intended.
left. All the overt acts of Odilon, Ronnie and the appellant before,
during, and after the stabbing incident indubitably show that they
In such a case, it is not necessary that each of the separate injuries conspired to kill the victim.
is fatal in itself. It is sufficient if the injuries cooperated in bringing
about the victim’s death. Both the offenders are criminally liable for
The victim died because of multiple stab wounds inflicted by two or
the same crime by reason of their individual and separate overt
more persons. There is no evidence that before the arrival of Ronnie
criminal acts.30 Absent conspiracy between two or more offenders,
and the appellant at the situs criminis, the victim was already dead. It
they may be guilty of homicide or murder for the death of the victim,
cannot thus be argued that by the time the appellant and Ronnie
one as a principal by direct participation, and the other as an
joined Odilon in stabbing the victim, the crime was already
accomplice, under Article 18 of the Revised Penal Code:
consummated.
Art. 18. Accomplices. – Accomplices are the persons who, not being
All things considered, we rule that Ronnie and the appellant
included in Article 17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by
conspired with Odilon to kill the victim; hence, all of them are
previous or simultaneous acts.
criminally liable for the latter’s death. The appellant is not merely an
accomplice but is a principal by direct participation.
To hold a person liable as an accomplice, two elements must concur:
(a) the community of criminal design; that is, knowing the criminal
design of the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the
Even assuming that the appellant did not conspire with Ronnie and Q So, how long did you stay at 606 Nueve de Pebrero after February
Odilon to kill the victim, the appellant is nevertheless criminally liable 5, 1988?
as a principal by direct participation. The stab wounds inflicted by
him cooperated in bringing about and accelerated the death of the A One week only, sir, and then three weeks after, I returned to
victim or contributed materially thereto.34 Nueve de Pebrero.

The trial court correctly overruled the appellant’s defense of alibi. Q The whole week after February 5, 1988, was Rene Pilola still living
Alibi is a weak, if not the weakest of defenses in a criminal at 606 Nueve de Pebrero?
prosecution, because it is easy to concoct but hard to disprove. To
serve as basis for acquittal, it must be established by clear and A I did not see him anymore, sir.
convincing evidence. For it to prosper, the accused must prove not
only that he was absent from the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission, but also that it was physically impossible for him to Q And then three weeks thereafter, you went back to Nueve de
have been present then.35 In this case, the appellant avers that at the Pebrero. Is that what you were then saying?
time of the stabbing incident, he was resting in the house of his
cousin at 606 Nueve de Pebrero Street as he was suffering from A Yes, sir.
stomach pain due to his ulcer. 36 But the appellant failed to adduce
any medical certificate that he was suffering from the ailment. Q Now, at the time that you went back to 606 Nueve de Pebrero,
Moreover, Elisa positively identified the appellant as one of the men was Rene Pilola there?
who repeatedly stabbed the victim. The appellant’s defense of alibi
cannot prevail over the positive and straightforward identification of A I did not see him anymore, sir.39
the appellant as one of the victim’s assailants. The appellant himself
admitted that his cousin’s house, the place where he was allegedly
The records show that the appellant knew that he was charged for
resting when the victim was stabbed, was merely ten to fifteen
the stabbing of the victim. However, instead of surrendering to the
meters away from the scene of the stabbing. Indeed, the appellant’s
police authorities, he adroitly evaded arrest. The appellant’s flight is
defense of denial and alibi, unsubstantiated by clear and convincing
evidence of guilt and, from the factual circumstances obtaining in the
evidence, are negative and self-serving and cannot be given greater
case at bar, no reason can be deduced from it other than that he was
evidentiary weight than the positive testimony of prosecution
driven by a strong sense of guilt and admission that he had no
eyewitness Elisa Rolan.37
tenable defense.40
The appellant’s defenses must crumble in the face of evidence that
The Crime Committed by the Appellant
he fled from the situs criminis and later left his house. The records
and the Proper Penalty Therefor
show that despite being informed that he was sought after by the
authorities as a suspect for the killing of the victim, the appellant
suddenly and inscrutably disappeared from his residence at Nueve The trial court correctly convicted the appellant of murder qualified by
de Pebrero. As early as May 5, 1988, a subpoena for the appellant treachery.1âwphi1 Abuse of superior strength likewise attended the
was returned unserved because he was "out of town." 38 The commission of the crime. There is treachery when the offender
appellant’s own witness, Julian Cadion, testified that the appellant commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means,
had left and was no longer seen at Nueve de Pebrero after the methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and
incident, thus: specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from
the defense which the offended party might make. The essence of WHEREFORE, the Decision, dated May 3, 1995, of Branch 164 of
treachery is the swift and unexpected attack on the unarmed victim the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City in Criminal Case No. 73615,
without the slightest provocation on his part. 41 In this case, the attack finding appellant Rene Gayot Pilola GUILTY beyond reasonable
on the unarmed victim was sudden. Odilon, without provocation, doubt of the crime of murder is AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION.
suddenly placed his arm around the victim’s neck and forthwith The appellant is hereby directed to pay to the heirs of the victim
stabbed the latter. The victim had no inkling that he would be Joselito Capa the amount of ₱50,000 as civil indemnity; the amount
attacked as he was attempting to pacify Edmar and Julian. Ronnie of ₱50,000 as moral damages; and the amount of ₱25,000 as
and the appellant, both also armed with deadly weapons, rushed to exemplary damages.
the scene and stabbed the victim, giving no real opportunity for the
latter to defend himself. And even as the victim was already SO ORDERED.
sprawled on the canal, Ronnie bashed his head with a hollow block.
The peacemaker became the victim of violence.
FIRST DIVISION
Unquestionably, the nature and location of the wounds showed that
G. R. No. 144621 - May 9, 2003
the killing was executed in a treacherous manner, preventing any
means of defense on the part of the victim. As testified to by Dr.
Bienvenido Muñoz, the victim was stabbed, not just once, but eleven PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ISAGANI
times mostly on the chest and the abdominal area. Six of the stab GUITTAP y PENGSON (Acquitted), WILFREDO
wounds were fatal, causing damage to the victim’s vital internal MORELOS y CRUZ (Acquitted), CESAR OSABEL @
organs.42 DANILO MURILLO @ DANNY @ SONNY VISAYA @
BENJIE CANETE, ARIEL DADOR y DE CHAVEZ
The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength is (Discharge), DECENA MASINAG VDA. DE RAMOS,
absorbed by treachery.43 There is no mitigating circumstance that LUISITO GUILLING @ LUISITO (Acquitted), and JOHN
attended the commission of the felony. The penalty for murder under DOE @ PURCINO, accused.
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion perpetua to death. DECENA MASINAG VDA. DE RAMOS, Appellant.
Since no aggravating and mitigating circumstances attended the
commission of the crime, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua, YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
conformably to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code.
Appellant Decena Masinag Vda. de Ramos assails the
Civil Liabilities of the Appellant
decision1 of the Regional Trial Court of Lucena City, Branch
60, in Criminal Case No. 92-387, finding her and accused
The trial court correctly directed the appellant to pay to the heirs of Cesar Osabel guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
the victim Joselita Capa the amount of ₱50,000 as civil indemnity ex Robbery with Homicide and sentencing each of them to
delicto, in accord with current jurisprudence. 44 The said heirs are
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with all the
likewise entitled to moral damages in the amount of ₱50,000, also
accessory penalties provided by law, and to indemnify the
conformably to current jurisprudence. 45 In addition, the heirs are
heirs of the victims the amounts of P100,000.00 as civil
entitled to exemplary damages in the amount of ₱25,000. 46
indemnity and P67,800.00 as actual damages.
On September 1, 1992, an Amended Information for with a total value of P67,800.00, owned by and belonging to
Robbery with Double Homicide was filed against appellant spouses Romualdo Jael and Lionela3 Caringal, without the
Masinag, Isagani Guittap y Pengson, Wilfredo Morelos y consent and against the will of the latter, to the damage
Cruz, Cesar Osabel,2 Ariel Dador y De Chavez, Luisito and prejudice of the aforementioned offended parties in the
Guilling and John Doe @ "Purcino". The accusatory portion aforestated sum of P67,800.00, Philippine Currency, and, on
of the information reads: the same occasion of such robbery, the said accused,
conspiring and confederating with one another, armed with
That on or about the 17th day of July 1992, in the City of the same bladed weapons, taking advantage of superior
Lucena, Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within the strength, and employing means to weaken the defense or of
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, means or persons to insure or afford impunity, and with
conspiring and confederating with one another, armed with intent to kill, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
bladed weapons, by means of violence, and with intent to feloniously stab both of said spouses Romualdo Jael and
gain, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously Lionela Caringal thereby inflicting upon the latter several
take, steal and carry away certain personal items, to wit: fatal wounds which directly caused the death of the
aforenamed spouses.
one solid gold ring valued at P8,000.00
(1) Contrary to law.4

one diamond ring valued at P40,000.00

Upon arraignment, appellant Masinag pleaded "not guilty."
(1)
Trial on the merits thereafter ensued. Accused Ariel Dador
one necklace with pendant valued at P2,000.00 was discharged as a state witness while accused Purcino
(1) remained at large.
cash money in the amount of P4,500.00
On February 15, 2000, the trial court rendered its decision,
one samsonite bag valued at P650.00
the dispositive portion of which states:
(1)
one .22 Cal. Squibbman with SN 64130 valued at WHEREFORE, premises considered, this court finds Cesar
(1) P5,000.00 Osabel and Decena Masinag GUILTY beyond reasonable
one pair of sandal valued at P650.00 doubt of the crime of robbery with homicide and they are
(1) sentenced to RECLUSION PERPETUA with all the accessory
penalties provided by law. For insufficiency of evidence, the
one music mate (karaoke) valued at P5,000.00
accused Isagani Guittap, Wilfrido Morelos and Luisito
(1)
Guilling are hereby ACQUITTED.
one jacket (adidas) valued at P1,000.00; and
(1) The accused Cesar Osabel and Decena Masinag are also
one pair of shoes valued at P1,000.00 ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Romualdo
(1) Jael and Leonila Caringal Jael in the amount of
(P100,000.00) One Hundred Thousand Pesos plus actual Dador accompanied the two to Sta. Cruz, Manila to dispose
damages of (P67,800.00) Sixty Thousand and Eight of the karaoke machine, he received another P500.00.
Hundred Pesos, Philippine Currency. Osabel had the rifle repaired in Gulang-Gulang, Lucena City.

SO ORDERED.5 Dador and Osabel were subsequently arrested for the killing
of a certain Cesar M. Sante. During the investigation, Dador
During the trial, state witness Ariel Dador testified that in executed an extrajudicial confession admitting complicity in
the evening of July 15, 1992, Cesar Osabel asked him and a the robbery and killing of the Jael spouses and implicating
certain Purcino to go with him to see appellant Masinag at appellant and Osabel in said crime. The confession was
her house in Isabang, Lucena City. When they got there, given with the assistance of Atty. Rey Oliver Alejandrino, a
Osabel and Masinag entered a room while Dador and former Regional Director of the Human Rights Commission
Purcino waited outside the house. On their way home, Office. Thereafter, Osabel likewise executed an extrajudicial
Osabel explained to Dador and Purcino that he and Masinag confession of his and appellant's involvement in the robbery
planned to rob the spouses Romualdo and Leonila Jael. He and killing of the Jaels, also with the assistance of Atty.
further told them that according to Masinag, the spouses Alejandrino.
were old and rich, and they were easy to rob because only
their daughter lived with them in their house. Simeon Tabor, a neighbor of the Jaels, testified that at 8:00
in the morning of July 17, 1992, he noticed that the victims,
The following day, at 7:00 p.m., Dador, Osabel, and Purcino who were known to be early risers, had not come out of
went to the house of the Jael spouses to execute the plan. their house. He started calling them but there was no
Osabel and Purcino went inside while Dador stayed outside response. He instructed his son to fetch the victims' son,
and positioned himself approximately 30 meters away from SPO1 Lamberto Jael. When the latter arrived, they all went
the house. Moments later, he heard a woman shouting for inside the house and found bloodstains on the floor leading
help from inside the house. After two hours, Osabel and to the bathroom. Tabor opened the bathroom door and
Purcino came out, carrying with them one karaoke machine found the lifeless bodies of the victims.
and one rifle. Osabel's hands were bloodied. He explained
that he had to tie both the victims' hands with the power Dr. Vicente F. Martinez performed the post-mortem
cord of a television set before he repeatedly stabbed them, examination on the bodies of the victims and testified that
He killed the spouses so they can not report the robbery to since rigor mortis had set in at the back of the neck of the
the authorities. victims, Romualdo Jael died between six to eight hours
before the examination while Leonila Jael died before
Osabel ordered Dador to hire a tricycle while he and Purcino midnight of July 16, 1992. The cause of death of the victims
waited inside the garage of a bus line. However, when was massive shock secondary to massive hemorrhage and
Dador returned with the tricycle, the two were no longer multiple stab wounds.
there. He proceeded to the house of Osabel and found him
there with Purcino. They were counting the money they got Appellant Masinag, for her part, denied involvement in the
from the victims. They gave him P300.00. Later, when robbery and homicide. She testified that she knew the
victims because their houses were about a kilometer apart. when Osabel told him on their way home. Thus, Dador had
She and Osabel were friends because he courted her, but no personal knowledge of how the plan to rob was actually
they never had a romantic relationship. She further claimed made and of appellant's participation thereof. Secondly,
that the last time she saw Osabel was six months prior to while Osabel initially implicated her in his extrajudicial
the incident. She did not know Dador and Guilling at the confession as one of the conspirators, he repudiated this
time of the incident. According to her, it is not true that she later in open court when he testified that he was forced to
harbored resentment against the victims because they execute his statements by means of violence.
berated her son for stealing their daughter's handbag. On
the whole, she denied any participation in a conspiracy to On direct examination, Dador narrated what transpired in
rob and kill the victims. the house of appellant on July 15, 1992, to wit:

From the decision convicting appellant Masinag and Osabel, PROSECUTOR GARCIA:
only the former appealed, based on the lone assigned error:
Q.         And do you remember the subject or subjects of
THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN that conversation that transpired among you?
FINDING ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT OF CONSPIRING WITH HER CO- A.         Yes, sir.
ACCUSED TO COMMIT THE CRIME OF ROBBERY WITH
HOMICIDE DESPITE THE ABSENCE OF HER ACTUAL
Q.         Please tell us what was the subject or subjects of
PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMISSION OF THE SAID CRIME.
the conversation that transpired among you on July 15,
1992 at the house of Decena Masinag?
The appeal is meritorious.
A.         The subject of our conversation there was the
While it is our policy to accord proper deference to the robbing of Sps. Jael, sir.
factual findings of the trial court,6 owing to their unique
opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and note
Q.         How did that conversation begin with respect to the
their demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grueling
proposed robbery of Sps. Jael?
examination,7 where there exist facts or circumstances of
weight and influence which have been ignored or
misconstrued, or where the trial court acted arbitrarily in its A.         It was only the two (2) who planned that supposed
appreciation of facts,8 we may disregard its findings. robbery, Daniel Murillo and Decena Masinag, sir.

Appellant contends that the extrajudicial confessions of Q.         And why were you able to say that it was Danilo
Osabel and Dador were insufficient to establish with moral Murillo and Decena Masinag who planned the robbery?
certainty her participation in the conspiracy. Firstly, Dador
was not present to hear appellant instigate the group to rob
the Jael spouses. He only came to know about the plan
A.         Because they were the only ones who were Under Rule 130, Section 36 of the Rules of Court, a witness
inside the house and far from us and they were inside can testify only to those facts which he knows of his own
the room, sir. personal knowledge, i.e., which are derived from his own
perception; otherwise, such testimony would be hearsay.
xxx - xxx - xxx Hearsay evidence is defined as "evidence not of what the
witness knows himself but of what he has heard from
Q.         On that night, July 15, 1992 did you ever have others."10 The hearsay rule bars the testimony of a witness
any occasion to talk with Decena Masinag together who merely recites what someone else has told him,
with your companions Danilo Murillo and Purcino? whether orally or in writing.11 In Sanvicente v. People,"12 we
held that when evidence is based on what was supposedly
told the witness, the same is without any evidentiary weight
A.         No, sir.
for being patently hearsay. Familiar and fundamental is the
rule that hearsay testimony is inadmissible as evidence.13
Q.         Was there any occasion on the same date that
Decena Masinag talk to you?
Osabel's extrajudicial confession is likewise inadmissible
against appellant. The res inter allos acta rule provides that
ATTY. FLORES: the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,
declaration, or omission of another.14 Consequently, an
Already answered, your Honor. extrajudicial confession is binding only upon the confessant
and is not admissible against his co-accused. The reason for
COURT: the rule is that, on a principle of good faith and mutual
convenience, a man's own acts are binding upon himself,
Witness, may answer. and are evidence against him. So are his conduct and
declarations. Yet it would not only be rightly inconvenient,
WITNESS: but also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound by
the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and if a party
None, sir. (emphasis ours)9 ought not to be bound by the acts of strangers, neither
ought their acts or conduct be used as evidence against
him.15
We find that the foregoing testimony of Dador was not
based on his own personal knowledge but from what Osabel
told him. He admitted that he was never near appellant and The rule on admissions made by a conspirator, while an
that he did not talk to her about the plan when they were at exception to the foregoing, does not apply in this case. In
her house on July 15, 1992. Thus, his statements are order for such admission to be admissible against a co-
hearsay and does not prove appellant's participation in the accused, Section 30, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court requires
conspiracy. that there must be independent evidence aside from the
extrajudicial confession to prove conspiracy. In the case at
bar, apart from Osabel's extrajudicial confession, no other
evidence of appellant's alleged participation in the
conspiracy was presented by the prosecution. There being conspiracy must be established by proof beyond reasonable
no independent evidence to prove it, her culpability was not doubt.20 Direct proof of a previous agreement need not be
sufficiently established. established, for conspiracy may be deduced from the acts of
appellant pointing to a joint purpose, concerted action and
Unavailing also is rule that an extrajudicial confession may community of interest. Nevertheless, except in the case of
be admissible when it is used as a corroborative evidence of the mastermind of a crime, it must also be shown that
other facts that tend to establish the guilt of his co-accused. appellant performed an overt act in furtherance of the
The implication of this rule is that there must be a finding of conspiracy.21
other circumstantial evidence which, when taken together
with the confession, establishes the guilt of a co-accused All told, the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of
beyond reasonable doubt.16 As earlier stated, there is no appellant with moral certainty. Its evidence falls short of the
other prosecution evidence, direct or circumstantial, which quantum of proof required for conviction. Accordingly, the
the extrajudicial confession may corroborate. constitutional presumption of appellant's innocence must be
upheld and she must be acquitted.
In People v. Berroya,17 we held that to hold an accused
liable as co-principal by reason of conspiracy, he must be WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the appealed
shown to have performed an overt act in pursuance or decision of the Regional Trial Court of Lucena City, Branch
furtherance of the conspiracy. That overt act may consist of 60 in Criminal Case No. 92-487, insofar only as it finds
active participation in the actual commission of the crime appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
itself, or it may consist of moral assistance to his co- Robbery with Homicide, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
conspirators by being present at the time of the commission Appellant Decena Masinag Vda. De Ramos is ACQUITTED of
of the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the the crime of Robbery with Homicide. She is ORDERED
other co-conspirators by moving them to execute or RELEASED unless there are other lawful causes for her
implement the conspiracy. continued detention. The Director of Prisons is DIRECTED to
inform this Court, within five (5) days from notice, of the
In the case at bar, no overt act was established to prove date and time when appellant is released pursuant to this
that appellant shared with and concurred in the criminal Decision.
design of Osabel, Dador and Purcino. Assuming that she had
knowledge of the conspiracy or she acquiesced in or agreed SO ORDERED.
to it, still, absent any active participation in the commission
of the crime in furtherance of the conspiracy, mere
knowledge, acquiescence in or agreement to cooperate is
not sufficient to constitute one as a party to a
conspiracy.18 Conspiracy transcends mere companionship.19

Conspiracy must be proved as convincingly as the criminal

act itself. Like any element of the offense charged,