Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1991 > August 1991 Decisions > G.R. No. 95351 August 9, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JIMMY LAURIO, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 95351. August 9, 1991.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JIMMY LAURIO and DOMINADOR "Tulong" LAURIO, Accused. DOMINADOR "Tulong" LAURIO, Accused-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Public Attorney’s Office for Accused-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY; MUST BE PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. — It is a basic principle of constitutional law that the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Lacking such certainty, the trial court has the duty to render a verdict of acquittal (People v. Macasinag, 173 SCRA 292). The same degree of proof necessary to establish the crime is required to establish a criminal conspiracy (People v. Drilon, Jr., 123 SCRA 72). It cannot be established by conjectures but by positive and conclusive evidence (People v. Martinez, 127 SCRA 260). A conspiracy may be inferred from the circumstances attending the commission of the crime, but, like any other ingredient of the offense, it must be established by clear and convincing evidence (People v. Agda, 111 SCRA 330).

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; RULE IN THE ABSENCE OF PROOF TO ESTABLISH CONSPIRACY; CASE AT BAR. — The evidence in this case shows only that the appellant, Dominador Laurio, and the deceased quarreled over a woman and that they had a fist fight. In anger, Dominador boxed Banculo on the jaw. His brother, Jimmy Laurio, immediately jumped into the fray by stabbing Banculo in different parts of the body and inflicting wounds which caused his death. There is no evidence that the brothers had conspired to kill Banculo or that Dominador had foreknowledge of what Jimmy (who apparently had no score to settle with Banculo) would do. Only a conspiracy between the brothers would qualify to murder Dominador’s act of boxing the victim, but such a conspiracy was not proven as indubitably as the homicide itself (People v. Felix Raquipo, 188 SCRA 571). Absent any evidence proving the gravity or duration of the physical injury inflicted by Dominador’s fist blow upon the victim, or proof of a conspiracy of the Laurio brothers to seriously injure or kill the victim, Dominador is presumed, and should be held, liable for slight physical injuries only (People v. Bautista, 30 SCRA 558; Art. 266, Revised Penal Code, Vol. II, 1987 Ed. by Aquino, pp. 603-605).


D E C I S I O N


GRIÑO-AQUINO, J.:


On July 25, 1989, the brothers, Jimmy and Dominador Laurio, were charged with murder in an information filed by the Provincial Prosecutor of Masbate, docketed as Criminal Case No. 5753 of the Regional Trial Court of Masbate, which reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"That on or about May 7, 1988 at midnight thereof, at sitio Bagong Sirang, Barangay Panique, Municipality of Aroroy, Province of Masbate, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused with intent to kill, evident premeditation and treachery, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously conspiring and helping each other, attack, assault, box and stab with a knife one Ely Banculo, hitting the latter on the different parts of the body, thereby inflicting wounds which directly caused his death.

"Contrary to law." (p. 7, Rollo.)

Upon arraignment, the accused Dominador Laurio, assisted by counsel de parte, entered a plea of "not guilty." Trial ensued only against him, because his co-accused, Jimmy Laurio, was, and still is, at large.

In the evening of May 7, 1988, a benefit dance was held in the dance hall at the public plaza in Bagong Sirang, Barangay Panique, Aroroy, Masbate. The dance was managed by Roberto Manlapaz who was president of the affair.

While the benefit dance was going on, Ely Banculo, Dominador Laurio, and Jimmy Laurio drank beer "grande" at a corner store near the plaza. When the three decided to retire, they offered a last drink to Roberto Manlapaz, who accepted it. Shortly after eleven o’clock in the evening, they asked permission to leave. After the three had departed, Manlapaz went to the comfort room about ten meters away. While he was there, he saw Dominador Laurio suddenly box Ely Banculo on the right jaw. The blow caused Banculo to fall on the ground. Instantly, Jimmy Laurio plunged his hand knuckle with a protruding blade three times into Banculo’s body as he lay on the ground, wounding him on the right nipple, on the back, and in the right armpit.

Since the place of the scuffle was well-lighted by a fluorescent lamp on a nearby coconut tree, Dominador’s neighbor, Andiolo Esquilona, who chanced to be passing by, witnessed the stabbing of Banculo by Jimmy Laurio. After rendering Banculo prostrate, the Laurio brothers fled.

Manlapaz reported the incident to the barangay captain, who went after the Laurio brothers straightaway. Dominador was arrested, but his brother Jimmy went into hiding and has remained at large.

Someone informed Banculo’s wife, Delia, about the stabbing of her husband. She rushed to the scene of the crime in time for her husband to inform her that he was stabbed by Jimmy and Dominador Laurio.

Banculo was brought to the Atlas Clinic for emergency treatment. Afterwards, he was moved to the clinic of Dr. Corpus, where he remained for two days and two nights. As his condition worsened, upon the advice of Dr. Corpus himself, Banculo was transferred to the Masbate Provincial Hospital where he underwent an operation in the lungs. Unfortunately, infection had already set in. He died of cardio-pulmonary arrest secondary to septicemia with severe hemothorax, secondary to stab wounds, chest anterior (Dr. Enrique O. Legaspi’s Certification Masbate Provincial Hospital).

In a decision dated July 24, 1990, the Regional Trial Court of Masbate (Br. 45) found Dominador Laurio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and to pay indemnity in the amount of P30,000 to the heirs of the victim, Ely Banculo, plus costs.chanrobles.com:cralaw:red

He has appealed that decision, alleging that the court a quo erred:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. in finding that he conspired with his brother, Jimmy, and employed treachery in killing the victim; and

2. in giving full credit to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses despite material inconsistencies.

There is merit in the appeal.

It is a basic principle of constitutional law that the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Lacking such certainty, the trial court has the duty to render a verdict of acquittal (People v. Macasinag, 173 SCRA 292). The same degree of proof necessary to establish the crime is required to establish a criminal conspiracy (People v. Drilon, Jr., 123 SCRA 72). It cannot be established by conjectures but by positive and conclusive evidence (People v. Martinez, 127 SCRA 260). A conspiracy may be inferred from the circumstances attending the commission of the crime, but, like any other ingredient of the offense, it must be established by clear and convincing evidence (People v. Agda, 111 SCRA 330).

The evidence in this case shows only that the appellant, Dominador Laurio, and the deceased quarreled over a woman and that they had a fist fight. In anger, Dominador boxed Banculo on the jaw. His brother, Jimmy Laurio, immediately jumped into the fray by stabbing Banculo in different parts of the body and inflicting wounds which caused his death. There is no evidence that the brothers had conspired to kill Banculo or that Dominador had foreknowledge of what Jimmy (who apparently had no score to settle with Banculo) would do. Only a conspiracy between the brothers would qualify to murder Dominador’s act of boxing the victim, but such a conspiracy was not proven as indubitably as the homicide itself (People v. Felix Raquipo, 188 SCRA 571). Absent any evidence proving the gravity or duration of the physical injury inflicted by Dominador’s fist blow upon the victim, or proof of a conspiracy of the Laurio brothers to seriously injure or kill the victim, Dominador is presumed, and should be held, liable for slight physical injuries only (People v. Bautista, 30 SCRA 558; Art. 266, Revised Penal Code, Vol. II, 1987 Ed. by Aquino, pp. 603-605).

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision is hereby modified, by finding appellant Dominador Laurio guilty of slight physical injuries only and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for thirty (30) days of arresto mayor, with the accessory penalties provided by law and to pay the costs If he has been detained for longer than that period, his immediate release from custody is hereby ordered, unless he is being held to answer for some other offense or offenses.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, Cruz, Gancayco and Medialdea, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






August-1991 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 66880 August 2, 1991 - VICTORIAS MILLING CO. INC. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74146 August 2, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REMELITO LUBREO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76500 August 2, 1991 - SPS. AQUILINO GATMAITAN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 92427 August 2, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO PIDO

  • G.R. No. 92739 August 2, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE BURGOS

  • G.R. No. 92871 August 2, 1991 - MARIA P. VDA. DE JOMOC, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93177 August 2, 1991 - JOSE COMENDADOR, ET AL. v. RENATO S. DE VILLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 94359 August 2, 1991 - AYALA INTEGRATED STEEL MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95818 August 2, 1991 - LEOPOLDO SY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96784 August 2, 1991 - BAC MANUFACTURING, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 42542 August 5, 1991 - CARLOS DIMAYUGA v. PHILIPPINE COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80591 August 6, 1991 - IN RE: DANIEL NGAYA-AN, ET AL. v. CONRADO BALWEG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82868 August 5, 1991 - DIOSCORO RABAGO, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83207 August 5, 1991 - MARCOPPER MINING CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84672 August 5, 1991 - IMPERIAL VICTORY SHIPPING AGENCY v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84846 August 5, 1991 - JESUS D. AGUJA v. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86320 August 5, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO V. RUMERAL

  • G.R. No. 87297 August 5, 1991 - ALFREDO VELOSO, ET AL. v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89376 August 5, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO O. LORENZO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90482 August 5, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90501 August 5, 1991 - ARIS (PHIL.) INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93072 August 5, 1991 - PACIFICO Y. OCAMPO v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93252 August 5, 1991 - RODOLFO T. GANZON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93433 August 5, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NGUYEN DINH NHAN

  • G.R. No. 95697 August 5, 1991 - PEREGRINO ROSALES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95445 August 6, 1991 - MANILA PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. PERFECTO LAGUIO, JR.

  • G.R. No. 81768 August 7, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO F. REMOROSA

  • G.R. No. 89762 August 7, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO M. LAZARTE

  • G.R. Nos. 90907-12 August 7, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONRADO DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76189 August 8, 1991 - ROBERTO M. OCA, JR., ET AL. v. CRESENCIANO B. TRAJANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 35495 August 9, 1991 - RAYMUNDO ANCHETA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83722 August 9, 1991 - MARITA CABANGIS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90338 August 9, 1991 - JAIME T. TORRES v. FIRST DIVISION, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 92643 August 9, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSEFINO DE LOS SANTOS

  • G.R. No. 93070 August 9, 1991 - NORMAN DE VERA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93213 August 9, 1991 - LUCIO TAN ALIM v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 94052 August 9, 1991 - ORIENTAL ASSURANCE CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95351 August 9, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JIMMY LAURIO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-90-495 August 12, 1991 - LOLITA MARTIN v. PLACIDO B. VALLARTA

  • A.C. No. 2285 August 12, 1991 - MARIA TIANIA v. AMADO OCAMPO

  • G.R. No. 46787 August 12, 1991 - FLORO CEMENT CORP. v. BENJAMIN K. GOROSPE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68491 August 12, 1991 - SALVADOR JACULINA v. NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 75052-53 August 12, 1991 - TAIHEI COMPANY LTD. AND MARITIME FACTORS, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82340 August 12, 1991 - DUMEZ COMPANY OF FRANCE v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90336 August 12, 1991 - RUPERTO TAULE v. LUIS T. SANTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 92376 August 12, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 92457-58 August 12, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILFREDO M. JIMENEZ

  • A.M. No. R-462-P August 13, 1991 - JOSE GULFIN v. CHRISOLDO SERRANO

  • G.R. No. 521518 August 13, 1991 - INT’L. HARDWOOD AND VENEER CO. OF THE PHIL. v. UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95709 August 13, 1991 - DULCE BEO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 3056 August 16, 1991 - FERNANDO T. COLLANTES v. VICENTE C. RENOMERON

  • A.M. No. MTJ-88-173 August 16, 1991 - SABENIANA M. PEREZ v. PANFILO W. ALPUERTO

  • A.M. No. MTJ-89-300 August 16, 1991 - HERMAN REY. SANTOS v. EDMUNDO M. ISIDRO

  • G.R. No. 54276 August 16, 1991 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. IGLESIA NI KRISTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 65864 August 16, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PABLO MANGULABNAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71153 August 16, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN PEÑONES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71694 August 16, 1991 - NYCO SALES CORPORATION v. BA FINANCE CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81337 August 16, 1991 - RICHARD V. PETRALBA v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82077 August 16, 1991 - MIDSAPAK TAMPAR, ET AL. v. ESMAEL USMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84613 August 16, 1991 - LAMBERTO MIRANDA v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • G.R. No. 85061 August 16, 1991 - EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC. v. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90529 August 16, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91551 August 16, 1991 - U.P. BOARD OF REGENTS, ET AL. v. JAINAL D. RASUL

  • G.R. No. 93719 August 16, 1991 - ARSENIO O. PELEO, JR. v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 95398 August 16, 1991 - MARIO R. MELCHOR v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • G.R. No. 95574 August 16, 1991 - HADJI WAHIDA MUSA, ET AL. v. COROCOY D. MOSON

  • G.R. No. 95627 August 16, 1991 - EDWIN B. VILLANUEVA v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95909 August 16, 1991 - UNILAND RESOURCES v. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 95915 August 16, 1991 - MITA PARDO DE TAVERA v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95937 August 16, 1991 - FORTUNE TOBACCO CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 97237 August 16, 1991 - FILIPINAS PORT SERVICES, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 97282 August 16, 1991 - PLARIDEL M. MINGOA v. LAND REGISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR

  • G.R. No. 98376 August 16, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BAYANI S. RIVERA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70082 August 19, 1991 - RICKY WONG, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80130 August 19, 1991 - BENJAMIN ABEJUELA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86523-24 August 19, 1991 - INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER MACLEOD, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 48327 August 21, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 86774 August 21, 1991 - ENEDINA PRESLEY v. BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, INC.

  • G.R. No. 92201 August 21, 1991 - RUDOLFO S. MAGAT, ET AL. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 93030-31 August 21, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO D. ALEGADO

  • G.R. No. 95133 August 21, 1991 - ATLAS CONSOLIDATED MINING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 59229 August 22, 1991 - HIJOS DE F. ESCAÑO, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77373 August 22, 1991 - EDMUNDO C. JOCOM v. ANDRES C. REGALADO

  • G.R. No. 89558 August 22, 1991 - IZOLA L. AQUINO v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91628 August 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MACARIO SANTITO, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95529 August 22, 1991 - MAGELLAN MANUFACTURING MARKETING CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93832 August 23, 1991 - SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 73765 August 26, 1991 - HANG LUNG BANK, LTD. v. FELINTRIYE G. SAULOG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 45947 August 27, 1991 - MARIANO AVILA, ET AL. v. LAURO L. TAPUCAR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82040 August 27, 1991 - BA FINANCE CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91797 August 28, 1991 - WIDOWS AND ORPHANS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.