Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2011 > September 2011 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 187078 : September 05, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. BERNARDO SURIO Y SAGUNOY AND MARIO HUMADIAO Y ANGELES :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 05 September 2011  which reads as follows:cralaw

G.R. No. 187078 (People of the Philippines v. Bernardo Surio y Sagunoy and Mario Humadiao y Angeles). - We resolve the appeal, filed by accused Bernardo Surio y Sagunoy and Mario Humadiao y Angeles (appellants), from the October 9, 2008 decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01881.^[1]

In its July 4, 2005 decision, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 81, convicted the appellants of murder^[2] for the killing of Teodorico Acol y Salvador on November 1, 2001. It gave credence to the testimonies of prosecution eyewitnesses Florentino Acol, Elizabeth Acol, and Floredeliza Acol, the victim's brother, wife, and sister, respectively, who had no ill-motive to falsely testify against the appellants. It noted that conspiracy attended the victim's killing, demonstrated by the appellant's concurrent acts (with Junie Surio, Edmundo Silvestre, and Napoleon Humadiao) of barging into the victim's residence, and of ganging up and attacking the victim. The RTC appreciated the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength because the aggressors were all armed; the Surio brothers were armed with knives, appellant Humadiao had a broken bottle, and Edmundo and Napoleon held lead pipes. It disregarded the aggravating circumstance of treachery because the victim was forewarned of the attack. It also disregarded the allegation of evident premeditation for lack of proof. The RTC sentenced the appellants to reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of the victim P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.^[3]cralaw

On intermediate appellate review, the CA affirmed the RTC's appreciation of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.^[4]

Our Ruling 

On final review, we dismiss the appeal but modify the awarded indemnities.

We find no reason to reverse the findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. We are convinced that the eyewitness accounts of Florentino, Elizabeth, and Floredeliza have amply established the case for the prosecution. Their relationship with the victim strengthens their credibility since it is unnatural for aggrieved relatives to accuse someone other than the actual culprit.^[5] The lower courts correctly held that conspiracy attended the killing, manifested by the coordinated manner of attack committed against the victim. A conspirator, no matter how minimal his participation, is as guilty as the principal perpetrator of the crime.^[6] Abuse of superior strength qualified the killing to murder since five armed persons attacked an unarmed victim; they took advantage of their collective strength to overwhelm their defenseless victim.^[7] Treachery cannot be appreciated because an altercation preceded the attack on the victim;^[8] the victim was already aware that the appellants would harm him. Since neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances attended the commission of the felony, the lower courts properly imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

While we affirm the CA's factual findings and the imprisonment imposed, we find it necessary to modify the appellant's civil liability. We additionally award temperate damages of P25,000.00. When death occurs by reason of homicide, temperate damages are due; even if no receipt or competent proof is presented to the court, expenses for the coffin and burial of the victim follow as a natural and undeniable consequence.^[9] In addition, exemplary damages of P30,000.00 should also be awarded since the crime was committed with the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength.^[10] The appellants are jointly and severally liable for the damages in light of the conspiracy that attended the killing.^[11]cralaw

WHEREFORE, the October 9, 2008 decision of the CA in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01881 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Appellants Bernardo Surio y Sagunoy and Mario Humadiao y Angeles are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and are sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. They are ordered to jointly and severally pay the heirs of the victim, Teodorico Acol y Salvador, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours, 

MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Division Clerk of Court

By:

(Sgd.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
Deputy Division Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Penned by Associate Justice Pampio A. Abarintos, and concurred in by Associate Justices Arcangelita M. Romilla-Lontok and Ramon R. Garcia; rollo, pp. 2-15.

^[2] See REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 248. 

^[3] Docketed as Criminal Case No. Q-01-105403; CA rollo, pp. 11-19. 

^[4] Supra note 1. 

^[5] People v. Guillera, G.R. No. 175829, March 20, 2009, 582 SCRA 160, 169; People v. Sameniano, G.R. No. 183703, January 20, 2009, 576 SCRA 840, 849. 

^[6] People v. Simon, 473 Phil. 336, 369 (2004). 

^[7] People v. Drew, 422 Phil. 614, 625-626 (2001). 

^[8] People v. Juan, 379 Phil. 645, 668 (2000). 

^[9] People v. Lucero, G.R. No. 179044, December 6, 2010, 636 SCRA 533, 543; People v. Asis, G.R. No. 177573, July 7, 2010, 624 SCRA 509, 531. 

^[10] Atizado v. People, G.R. No. 173822, October 13, 2010, 633 SCRA 105, 122; People v. Sanchez, G.R. No. 188610, June 29, 2010, 622 SCRA 548, 569. 

^[11] People v. Honor, G.R. No. 175945, April 7, 2009, 584 SCRA 546, 560. 

^[*] Reyes, J., on official leave; Mendoza, J., designated as Additional Member per Special Order No. 1066 dated August 23, 2011.