People v Continente August 25, 2000 De Leon, Jr., J. Facts: US Col. James o!e !as am"us#e$ an$ %ille$ !#ile $riving #is car. e C'S agents esta"lis#e$ t#roug# a con(i$ential intelligence in(ormation t#e involvement o( appellant Donato Continente, an emplo)ee o( t#e U.P. Collegian in U.P an$ t#e ot#er appellant 'taas. *it# counsels present, t#e) e+ecute$ e+trau$icial e+trau$icial con(essions a$mitting to t#e crime. e &rial court convicte$ t#em "ase$ on t#e testimon) o( t#e star !itness an$ t#eir con(essions. e) claim t#at t#at t#eir con(essions con(essions are are ina$missi"le. ina$missi"le.
'ssue: *- Statement a$missi"le/ el$-atio: 1S. See case (or transcript o( con(ession. 't must "e note$ #o!ever, t#at (ar (rom "eing a mere enumeration o( t#e custo$ial rig#ts o( an accuse$, t#e a(ore3uote$ portions 4Pali!anag6 4Pali!anag6 o( t#e !ritten statements contain an e+planation as to t#e nature o( t#e investigation t#at is, regar$ing t#e respective participations participations o( t#e appellants in t#e am"us# on April 27, 7898 t#at resulte$ in t#e %illing o( U.S. Col. James o!e !#ile seriousl) !oun$ing #is $river, Joa3uin inu)a. e) also inclu$e an a$vice t#at t#e appellants ma) c#oose not to give an) statement to t#e investigator an$ a !arning t#at an) statement o"taine$ (rom t#e appellants ma) "e use$ in (avor or against t#em in court. 'n a$$ition, t#e) contain an a$vice t#at t#e appellants ma) engage t#e services o( a la!)er o( t#eir o!n c#oice. '( t#e) cannot a;or$ t#e services o( a la!)er, t#e) !ill "e provi$e$ !it# one ") t#e government (or (ree. erea(ter, erea(ter, "ot# appellants mani(este$ to C'S 'nvestigator irgilioPa irgilioPa"lico "lico t#eir intentions to give t#eir statements even in t#e a"sence o( counsel. Despite t#e mani(estations o( t#e appellants, 'nvestigator Pa"lico re3ueste$ (or t#e legal services o( Att).
(or appellant 'taas. Signi?cantl), 'nvestigator Pa"lico $isclose$ t#at appellant Continente con(erre$ !it# Att). =anansala in #is presence (or a"out #al( an #our "e(ore t#e investigation starte$. evert#eless, evert#eless, t#e appellant 4Continente6 maintaine$ #is $ecision to give a statement even in t#e a"sence o( counsel. As proo( t#ereo(, t#e appellant signe$t#e Pagpapatuna) t#at contains an e+press !aiver o( #is constitutional rig#ts in t#e presence o( Att). =anansala !#o also signe$ t#e same as counsel o( t#e appellant. o "asis (or torture e) a$mitte$ t#e) !ere mem"ers o( CPP-PA Anot#er issue: *itness testimon) is straig#t(or!ar$, an$ ta%en in conunction !it# a$mission, ruling must "e a@rme$ 4actuall) mo$i?e$ pero guilt) paren6
[G.R. Nos. 100801-02. August 25, 2000]
PEOP PE OPLE LE OF TH THE E PH PHIL ILIP IPPI PINE NES, S, plaintiff DONAT TO B. plaintiff-appellee, -appellee, vs. DONA ONTINENTE !"# $%ANITO T. ITAAS, $OHN DOE, PETER DOE, $A&E $A &ES S DO DOE, E, PA%L DOE !" !"# # SE SE' 'ER ERA AL OT OTH HER DOE OES S (! (!tt )!*g+, accused, DO DONA NAT TO B. O ONT NTIN INEN ENTE TE !" !"# # $% $%A ANI NITO TO T. ITAAS, accused-appellants. DEISION DE LEON, $R., J . .
Before us on appeal is the Decision [1] dated February 27, 1991 of the Regional Trial ourt of !ue"on ity, Branch ##, in ri$inal ases %os& #9'(#() and #9'(#(( finding herein appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the cri$es of $urder and frustrated $urder $urder,, respe respect cti*e i*ely ly for for the the +illin +illing g of &-& &-& ol& ol& .a$es .a$es %& Ro/e Ro/e and and for seriou seriously sly /ounding .oa0uin inuya& t appears that appellant Donato ontinente and se*eral other .ohn Does /ere initially charged /ith the cri$es of $urder and frustrated $urder in t/o 324 separate nfor$ations dated .une 25, 19#9 in connection /ith the shooting incident on 6pril 21, 19#9 at the corner of To$as orato -treet and Ti$og 6*enue in !ue"on ity /hich caused the death of &-& ol& .a$es %& Ro/e /hile seriously /ounding his dri*er, .oa0uin inuya& 6fter the arrest of another suspect, .uanito taas, on 6ugust 27, 19#9 in Da*ao ity, the prosecution, /ith prior lea*e of court, filed t/o 324 separate a$ended nfor$ations for $urder and frustrated $urder to include .uanito T& taas, a$ong the other accused& The a$ended nfor$ations in ri$inal ases %os& #9'(#() and #9' (#(( read8 */"!) !s+ No. -8-83 4o* &u*#+*
That on or about the 21st day of 6pril, 19#9, in !ue"on ity, :hilippines, and /ithin the ;urisdiction of this & .6?- %& R=@?, a &-& 6r$y =fficer, by then and there firing at hi$ /hile then on board a Toyota car, hitting hi$ on the different parts of his body, thereby inflicting upon hi$ serious and $ortal gunshot /ounds, /hich /ere the direct and i$$ediate cause of his death, to the da$age and pre;udice of the heirs of said ol& .a$es %& Ro/e in such a$ount as $ay be a/arded under the pro*isions of the i*il ode& =%TR6RA T= >6@& >6@& */"!) !s+ No. -8-8 4o* F*ust*!t+# &u*#+*
That on or about the 21st day of 6pril 19#9, in !ue"on ity, :hilippines, and /ithin the ;urisdiction of this 6@& pon being arraigned on 6ugust )1, 19#9, appellant Donato B& ontinente, assisted by his counsel of choice, pleaded %ot guilty to each of the a$ended nfor$ations in both cri$inal cases& =n the scheduled arraign$ent of appellant .uanito taas on =ctober )1, 19#9, appellant taas, upon the ad*ice of his counsel, refused to enter any plea& ancer car /hen it sped a/ay fro$ the site of the a$bush& [2] The sa$e Toyota orolla car /as later reco*ered on the sa$e day by a tea$ fro$ the :hilippine onstabulary 3:4, %orth -ector o$$and, led by :-gt& Fer$in ar$a, at %o& ( @indsor -treet, -an Francisco Del onte in !ue"on ity& [)] pon further in*estigation of the case, the - agents established through a confidential intelligence infor$ation the in*ol*e$ent of appellant Donato ontinente, an e$ployee of the &:& ollegian in &:& Dili$an, !ue"on ity, in the a$bush of ol&
.a$es Ro/e and his dri*er& 6ccordingly, on .une 1G, 19#9, the - in*estigation tea$ proceeded to the &:& ca$pus in Dili$an, !ue"on ity to conduct a sur*eillance on appellant Donato ontinente& 6fter accosting appellant ontinente inside the said &:& ca$pus, the - tea$ too+ hi$ to a$p ra$e in !ue"on ity for 0uestioning& [(] During the interrogation /hich /as conducted by - n*estigator irgilio :ablico in the presence of 6tty& Bonifacio anansala in a$p ra$e on .une 17, 19#9, appellant ontinente ad$itted to his participation in the a$bush of ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er as a $e$ber of the sur*eillance unit under the :olitical 6ssassination Tea$ of the ::'%:6& [H] 6$ong the docu$ents confiscated fro$ appellant ontinente by the agents, and for /hich a receipt dated .une 1G, 19#9 /as prepared and issued by -gt& Reynaldo dela ru", /as a letter addressed to -a Iinauu+ulan& 6t the dorsal right hand side of the letter appear the acrony$s -TR :6TR /hich allegedly $ean -a Tagu$pay ng Rebolusyon and :olitical 6ssassination Tea$, Regional o$$and& [G] 6nother confidential intelligence infor$ation established the participation of appellant .uanito taas in the said a$bush of ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er on 6pril 21, 19#9& 6ppellant taas, /ho /as a +no/n $e$ber of the -parro/ nit of the %:6 based in Da*ao ity /as arrested in Da*ao ity and /as brought to anila by apt& il eneses for in*estigation& [7] - n*estigator irgilio :ablico in*estigated and too+ do/n the state$ents of appellant taas /ho disclosed during the in*estigation that he /as an acti*e $e$ber of the -parro/ nit of the %:6 based in Da*ao ity and confessed, in the presence of 6tty& File$on orpu" /ho apprised and eplained to hi$ his constitutional rights, that he /as one of those /ho fired at the gray itsubishi alant car of ol& .a$es Ro/e at the corner of To$as orato -treet and Ti$og 6*enue on 6pril 21, 19#9& [#] The said appellant identified the Toyota orolla car that the assailants rode on 6pril 21, 19#9 and the gray itsubishi alant car of ol& Ro/e& [9] ean/hile, it appears that the a$bush on ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er /as /itnessed by a certain eria$ Julueta& The testi$ony of prosecution eye/itness eria$ R& Julueta re*eals that at around 7855 oCcloc+ in the $orning of 6pril 21, 19#9, she /as about to cross the To$as orato -treet on her /ay to the .-6 o$pound in !ue"on ity to attend a practicu$ in the .-6 ess ancer car& [12] :rosecution eye/itness Julueta li+e/ise recogni"ed the dri*er of the /hite itsubishi >ancer car as the sa$e person /ho$ she had encountered on t/o occasions& Julueta disclosed that in the $orning of 6pril 19, 19#9, the /hite itsubishi >ancer car /as par+ed along the side of To$as orato -treet /hich /as near the
corner of -cout adrinas -treet& ancer car /hich /as then par+ed along the side of To$as orato -treet /hile she /as again on her /ay to attend practicu$ in the .-6 o$pound& -he learned of the identity of the dri*er as a certain Ray$ond %a*arro, /ho is allegedly a $e$ber of the %:6, fro$ the pictures sho/n her by the - in*estigators in a$p ra$e& [1)] :rosecution /itness Julueta also recogni"ed appellant Donato ontinente /ho$ she had encountered on at least three 3)4 occasions at a carinderia outside the .-6 o$pound&una una
the other hand, Dr& -antiago identified the $edical report dated 6pril 2H, 19#9 that he prepared relati*e to the treat$ent that he ad$inistered on .oa0uin inuya& The report sho/s that inuya sustained three 3)4 superficial in;uries on the scalp, on the left shoulder, and on the bac+ of the left hand /hich could ha*e been caused by bullets that ca$e fro$ a gunE and that the /ounds could ha*e caused the death of inuya /ithout the $edical treat$ent that lasted for four 3(4 days& [19] For the defense, appellant .uanito taas testified and denied the truth of the contents of his s/orn state$ents /hich are respecti*ely dated 6ugust 29, 19#9 and 6ugust )5, 19#9, insofar as the sa$e establish his participation in the a$bush of ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er on 6pril 21, 19#9& 6ppellant taas testified that he /as allegedly tortured by his captors on 6ugust 27 and 2#, 19#9 in Da*ao ityE that he /as blindfolded and a $as+ing tape /as placed on his $outhE and that subse0uently, he /as hit and $auled /hile a cellophane /as placed on his head thus, causing hi$ to loss consciousness& [25] 6ppellant taas further testified that he affied his signatures on his s/orn state$ents dated 6ugust 29 and )5, 19#9 in the presence of the - officers and that 6tty& File$on orpus /as not present during those t/o occasions& The said appellant ad$itted ha*ing s/orn to the truth of the contents of his said s/orn state$ents before the ad$inistering fiscal, but he disclosed that the - officers pre*iously threatened hi$ to ad$it the contents of the t/o s/orn state$ents& [21] 6ppellant Donato ontinente testified that he /as /or+ing as $essenger /ith the &:& ollegian, an official $onthly publication of the ni*ersity of the :hilippines&
he 36tty& anansala4 signed, $erely as /itness, the first page of his s/orn state$ent, /hich is the /ai*er of his constitutional rights& [2)] =n rebuttal, prosecution /itness -gt& Reynaldo dela ru" testified that he prepared and issued the receipt for the docu$ents /hich he confiscated fro$ appellant ontinente on .une 1G, 19#9E and that it is the standard operating procedure in the to put a blindfold on an arrested suspected %:6 $e$ber in order to /ithhold fro$ hi$ the *ie/ and location of the entrance, the eit and the terrain in the ca$p& [2(] The testi$ony of - n*estigator irgilio :ablico on rebuttal re*eals that during the in*estigation of appellants Donato ontinente and .uanito taas, their respecti*e la/yers na$ely, 6tty& Bonifacio anansala and 6tty& File$on orpu", /ere presentE that appellants ontinente and taas conferred /ith their la/yers before they ga*e their state$ents to the - in*estigatorE that the - in*estigator typed only the state$ents that the appellants had gi*en hi$ in response to his 0uestions during the in*estigationE that both appellants /ere acco$panied by their respecti*e la/yers /hen they /ere brought to the fiscal for in0uestE and that said appellants /ere ne*er tortured nor threatened during the in*estigations of these cases& [2H] The trial court rendered its decision [2G] in ri$inal ases %os& !'#9'(#() to (( on February 2#, 1991 finding both appellants .uanito taas and Donato ontinente guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the cri$es of $urder and frustrated $urder& t ruled, thus8
n assessing the e*idence against co'accused ontinente, it is undeniable that the yardstic+ of his culpability hangs in the *alidity of the etra';udicial confession he had eecuted& 6 close scrutiny of the docu$ent /ould re*eal that the confession is free fro$ any taint of illegality and thus ser*es as a basis for his con*iction& The presu$ption of la/ that official duty has been regularly perfor$ed has not been satisfactorily contro*erted by the accused& ircu$stances sho/ that ontinenteCs /ai*er /as done /ith the assistance of a counsel of his choice& The records indicate that 6tty& Bonifacio anansala /as accusedCs counsel during his custodial in*estigation and his arraign$ent and that his counsel during the trial /as a relati*e of the afore$entioned la/yer& These factors are undeniable e*idence of trust reposed upon 6tty& Bonifacio anansala by the accused& ontinente also ad$itted on cross'ea$ination that he had read his state$ent /hich included the :6:6:6T%6A containing his /ai*er of constitutional rights 3T-% 29 6ugust 1995 p& 294& 6ccused /as raised in etro anila and spo+e Tagalog, thus /ould not ha*e any difficulty in co$prehending the 0uestions addressed to hi$ and the infor$ation relayed to hi$ /ith respect to his rights& The court can not e0uate that /hene*er a suspect is ta+en into
custody and is fearful of his safety, the police authorities had eercised pressure or had threatened if not sub;ected the$ to physical abuse& oreo*er, the fact that the accused ad$itted that his ans/ers /ere typed as he spo+e the$ 3T-% 6ugust )5 1995 p&(4 lea*es no roo$ for :ablico to fabricate an ans/er& &
The prosecution e*idence gathered against accused taas cradles on t/o incri$inating points& The Julueta testi$ony and his etra ;udicial confession /or+ing independently, one /ithout the other, ha*e the force capable of con*icting the accused& The interplay of these t/o *aluable e*idence solidifies a ruling of guilt against accused taas& The defense raised by the accused is not sufficient to o*errule this ourtCs deter$ination of guilt against taas& The testi$ony of Julueta has been candid and straightfor/ard, de*oid of any $aterial contradiction& %o $oti*e has been i$puted to assail the credibility of her testi$ony& &
@ith respect to the etra';udicial confession eecuted by accused taas, the ourt finds that such /as $ade pursuant to the onstitution& 6lthough it $ay be argued that accused resides in Da*ao, the fact that he could understand Tagalog as ad$itted by hi$ in his testi$ony and pro*en by the proceedings in court /here he /as ans/ering 0uestions addressed to hi$ in Tagalog $ilitates against his inability to co$prehend his right and its subse0uent /ai*er& ounsel for accused contests the independence and co$petence of 6tty& File$on orpu" on the ground that said la/yer /as a $ilitary la/yer& 6lthough the $ilitary bac+ground of 6tty& orpu" is ad$itted, this does not auto$atically dis0ualify hi$ to act as la/yer for the accused& :roof of the fact that he failed to render his duty to safeguard the rights of the accused $ust be sho/n before this court nullifies the /eight of taasC etra';udicial confession& The allegation of torture si$ilarly rings hollo/& %o $edical certificate had been sho/n by the accused that he had indeed suffered brutal treat$ent fro$ his ;ailers specially since he had alleged to ha*e been treated by a doctor for his in;uries& Thereafter, the trial court $eted out the follo/ing penalties on the appellants8
@TA beyond reasonable doubt of the cri$es of RD?R and FR-TR6T?D RD?R, and each is hereby sentenced to suffer an i$prison$ent of R?>-=% :?R:?T6 for the +illing of ol& .a$es Ro/e, to pay :)5,555&55 to the heirsE and an i$prison$ent fro$ Ten 3154 Aears and =ne 314 Day of :R-=% 6A=R as % to -e*enteen 3174 Aears, Four 3(4 onths and =ne 314 Day of R?>-=% T?:=R6> as 6L for the cri$e co$$itted against .oa0uin inuya, and to pay the cost& -= =RD?R?D& Fro$ the foregoing ;udg$ent of the trial court, appellants Donato ontinente and .uanito taas separately instituted the instant appeal& =n arch 1H, 199), appellant Donato ontinente filed his 6ppellantCs Brief [27] /hile appellant .uanito taas filed his 6ppellantCs Brief [2#] on arch H, 199)& The =ffice of the -olicitor eneral filed the 6ppelleeCs Brief [29] for the :eople on =ctober (, 199)& 6ppellant taas filed a Reply Brief [)5] on Dece$ber ), 199)& 6ppellant ontinente raised the follo/ing assign$ents of error by the trial court8 I
T <=%=R6B>? >=@?R =RT ?RR?D % 6DTT% 6%D % :R=B6T? 6>? T= T ?LTR6'.D6> =%F?--=% =F 6-?D'6::?>>6%T =%T%?%T?& II
T <=%=R6B>? >=@?R =RT ?RR?D % % R?D?%? T= T D?%TF6T=% =F 6-?D'6::?>>6%T =%T%?%T? BA T :R=-?T=%C- >=%? @T%?--& III
T <=%=R6B>? >=@?R =RT ?RR?D % F%D% 6-?D' 6::?>>6%T =%T%?%T? >TA B?A=%D R?6-=%6B>? D=BT =F T R?- <6R?D& =n the other hand, appellant taas interposed the follo/ing assign$ents of error8 I
T >=@?R =RT =TT?D R??R-B>? ?RR=R % 6DTT% 6%D 6::R?6T% T ?A?@T%?-- T?-T=%A =F ?R6 J>?T6& II
T >=@?R =RT =TT?D R??R-B>? ?RR=R % 6DTT% 6%D 6::R?6T% T 6>>??D ?LTR6'.D6> =%F?--=%- =F 6-?D'6::?>>6%T T66-& III
T >=@?R =RT =TT?D R??R-B>? ?RR=R % 6DTT% T?-T=%6> 6%D :<=T=R6:< ?D?%? -<=@% T 6-?D'6::?>>6%T :=-% B?-D? T 6B->??D 6R-& I'
T >=@?R =RT =TT?D R??R-B>? ?RR=R % <=>D% T<6T T :R=-?T=% @6- 6B>? T= :R=? 6>> T ?--?%T6> ?>??%T- =F T R?- <6R?D& '
T ?LT?%-? :B>TA BA T 6T<=RT?- D?:T% 6-?D'6::?>>6%T T66- 6- T R=@? I>>?R, 6 =%-T 6%D 6 ?B?R =F T ::%:6%DF6BB %F>?%?D ?R6 J>?T6C- D?%TF6T=% =F 6-?D' 6::?>>6%T 6%D T >=@?R =RTC- .D?%T& The principal issues are8 1& @hether or not the /ai*ers of the constitutional rights during custodial in*estigation by the appellants /ere *alidE and 2& @hether or not the testi$ony of prosecution eye/itness eria$ Julueta /as credible&
The rights of the accused during custodial in*estigation are enshrined in 6rticle , -ection 12 314 of the 19#7 onstitution /hich pro*ides that8
-ec& 12& 314 6ny person under in*estigation for the co$$ission of an offense shall ha*e the right to be infor$ed of his right to re$ain silent and to ha*e co$petent and independent counsel preferably of his o/n choice& f the person cannot afford the ser*ices of counsel, he $ust be pro*ided /ith
one& These rights cannot be /ai*ed ecept in /riting and in the presence of counsel& The rights to re$ain silent and to counsel $ay be /ai*ed by the accused pro*ided that the constitutional re0uire$ents are co$plied /ith& t $ust appear clear that the accused /as initially accorded his right to be infor$ed of his right to re$ain silent and to ha*e a co$petent and independent counsel preferably of his o/n choice& n addition, the /ai*er $ust be in /riting and in the presence of counsel& f the /ai*er co$plies /ith the constitutional re0uire$ents, then the etra;udicial confession /ill be tested for *oluntariness, [)1] i& e&, if it /as gi*en freely'/ithout coercion, inti$idation, induce$ent, or false pro$isesE and credibility,[)2] i&e&, if it /as consistent /ith the nor$al eperience of $an+ind& n assailing the *alidity of their /ritten state$ents, appellants Donato ontinente and .uanito taas contend that they /ere not properly infor$ed of their custodial rights under the constitution as to enable the$ to $a+e a *alid /ai*er& The pertinent portion of appellant Donato ontinenteCs /ritten state$ent dated .une 17, 19#9 is 0uoted hereunder, to /it8
:6>@6%68 & Donato ontinente, ang pagsisiyasat na ito ay $ay +inala$an sa pag+a+a'a$bush at pagpatay +ay &-& 6r$y olonel .a$es Ro/e ng .-6& Bago +ita si$ulang tanungin ay nais +o $unang ipabatid sa iyo ang iyong $ga +arapatan alinsunod sa ating u$iiral na -aligang Batas& to ay ang $ga su$usunod8 na, i+a/ ay $ay +arapatang $anahi$i+ o hu/ag $agbigay ng salaysay& Iung i+a/ ay $agbibigay ng salaysay, ipinaalala +o sa iyo na anu$ang sasabihin $o sa salaysay $ong ito ay $aaaring ga$iting ebidensiya pabor o laban sa iyo sa anu$ang hu+u$an dito sa :ilipinas& +ala/a, +arapatan $ong $ag+aroon ng abogado ayon sa iyong sariling pili habang i+a/ ay a+ing tinatanong& Iung i+a/ ay /alang +a+ayanang u$upa ng abogado, i+a/ ay bibigyan na$in ng isang abogado ng gobyerno bilang tu$ayo na iyong tagapayo at ng sa gayon ay $aprote+tahan ang iyong $ga +arapatan& +atlo, +arapatan $ong $ala$an at $apagpali/anagan ng $ga +arapatan $ong ito& T6%=%8 %auuna/aan $o ba ang $ga +arapatan $ong itoM -6=T8 =po& %auuna/aan +o po&
T6%=%8 ayroon +a bang abogado na naririto sa ngayon upang siya $ong $aging tagapayoM -6=T8 @ala po pero na+apagdesisyon na po a+o na a+o ay $agbibigay ng salaysay +ahit na /ala a+ong na+aharap na abogado& T6%=%8 & ontinente, ang pagsusu+o ng $ga +arapatan, ayon narin sa batas, ay +ina+ailangang ga/in sa harap ng isang abogado& :ayag +a bang $agsu+o ng iyong $ga +arapatan sa harap ng isang abogado ng gobyernoM -6=T8 :u$apayag po a+o& T6%=%8 %a+ahanda +a rin bang lu$agda sa isang pagpapatunay na i+a/ ay napagpali/anagan ng iyong $ga +arapatan, at nauuna/aan $o ang $ga +arapatan $ong itoM -6=T8 =po& [))]
=n the other hand, the pertinent portion of appellant taasC /ritten state$ent dated 6ugust 29, 19#9 is 0uoted, to /it8 51& :6>@6%68 & .uanito taas, ang pagsisiyasat na ito ay $ay +inala$an sa pag+a+aa$bush at pagpatay +ay olonel .a$es Ro/e ng .-6 at pag+asugat ng +anyang dri*er& Bago +ita si$ulang tanungin ay nais +o $unang ipabatid sa iyo ang iyong $ga +arapatan alinsunod sa ating Bagong -aligang Batas& to ay $ga su$usunod& na, i+a/ ay $ay +arapatang $anahi$i+ o hu/ag $agbigay ng salaysay& Iung i+a/ ay $agbibigay ng salaysay, ipinaalala +o sa iyo na anu$ang sabihin $o sa salaysay $ong ito ay $aaaring ga$iting ebidensiya pabor o laban sa iyo sa anu$ang hu+u$an dito sa :ilipinas& +ala/a, +arapatan $ong $ag+aroon ng pili at sarili $ong abogado habang i+a/ ay a+ing tinatanong& Iung i+a/ ay /alang pa$bayad ng abogado, i+a/ ay bibigyan ng gobyerno ng abogado na /ala +ang aalalahaning anu$ang +abayaran& +atlo, +arapatan $ong $ala$an at $apagpali/anagan ng $ga +arapatan $ong ito& T6%=%8 %auuna/aan $o ba ang $ga +arapatan $ong itoM -6=T8 =po& T6%=%8 ayroon +a bang abogado na naririto sa ngayon upang i+a/ ay patnubayanM -6=T8 @ala po pero a+o ay na+ahandang $agbigay ng salaysay +ahit na /ala a+ong na+aharap na abogado& T6%=%8 & taas, ayon din sa batas, ang pagsusu+o ng $ga +arapatan ay +ailangan ding pagtibayin sa harap ng isang abogado, na+ahanda +a bang $agsu+o ng iyong $ga +arapatan sa harap ng isang abogado na bigay sa iyo ng gobyernoM -6=T8 =po& %a+ahanda po a+o& T6%=%8 %a+ahanda +a rin bang lu$agda sa isang pagpapatunay na i+a/ ay napagpali/anagan ng iyong $ga +arapatan at nauuna/aan $o na$an ang $ga +arapatan $ong itoM -6=T8 =po& [)(]
6lso, the pertinent portion of his 3taas4 supple$ental /ritten state$ent dated 6ugust )5, 19#9 is 0uoted hereunder, to /it8
:6>@6%68 & taas, ang pagsisiyasat na ito ay $ay +inala$an pa rin sa pag+a+a'a$bush at pagpatay +ay &-& olonel .a$es Ro/e& Tulad sa nauna $ong pagbibigay ng salaysay, ipinaalala +o sa iyo na $uli ang iyong $ga +arapatang $anahi$i+, $ag+aroon ng pili at sariling abogado at +arapatang $apagpali/anagan ng $ga +arapatan $ong ito& %auuna/aan $o ba ang $ga +arapatan $ong itoM -6=T8 =po& T6%=%8 %a+ahanda +a pa rin bang $agbigay ng salaysay at ipapatuloy ang pagbibigay $o ng salaysayM -6=T8 =po& T6%=%8 %a+ahanda +a bang lu$agdang $uli ng isang pagpapatunay na i+a/ ay napagpali/anagan ng iyong $ga +arapatan at handa +a ring isu+o ang $ga +arapatan $oM -6=T8 =po& [)H]
@e ha*e consistently declared in a string of cases that the ad*ice or :ali/anag found at the beginning of etra;udicial confessions that $erely enu$erate to the accused his custodial rights do not $eet the standard pro*ided by la/& They are terse and perfunctory state$ents that do not e*ince a clear and sufficient effort to infor$ and eplain to the appellant his constitutional rights& [)G] @e e$phasi"ed that /hen the constitution re0uires a person under in*estigation to be infor$ed of his rights to re$ain silent and to ha*e an independent and co$petent counsel preferably of his o/n choice, it $ust be presu$ed to conte$plate the trans$ission of $eaningful infor$ation rather than ;ust the cere$onial and perfunctory recitation of an abstract constitutional principle& [)7] n other /ords, the right of a person under in*estigation to be infor$ed i$plies a correlati*e obligation on the part of the police in*estigator to eplain, and conte$plates an effecti*e co$$unication that results in understanding of /hat is con*eyed& -hort of this, there is a denial of the right& [)#] n the case of :eople *s& .ara, [)9] /e declared that8
This stereotyped ad*ice appearing in practically all etra;udicial confessions /hich are later repudiated has assu$ed the nature of a legal for$ or $odel& :olice in*estigators either auto$atically type it together /ith the curt =po as the ans/er or as+ the accused to sign it or e*en copy it in their o/n hand/riting& ts tired, punctilious, fied, and artificially stately style does not create an i$pression of *oluntariness or e*en understanding on the part of the accused& The sho/ing of a spontaneous, free, and unconstrained gi*ing up of a right is $issing& t $ust be noted ho/e*er, that far fro$ being a $ere enu$eration of the custodial rights of an accused, the afore0uoted portions 3:ali/anag4 of the /ritten state$ents contain an eplanation as to the nature of the in*estigation that is, regarding the respecti*e participations of the appellants in the a$bush on 6pril 21, 19#9 that resulted in the +illing of &-& ol& .a$es Ro/e /hile seriously /ounding his dri*er, .oa0uin inuya& They also include an ad*ice that the appellants $ay choose not to gi*e any
state$ent to the in*estigator and a /arning that any state$ent obtained fro$ the appellants $ay be used in fa*or or against the$ in court& n addition, they contain an ad*ice that the appellants $ay engage the ser*ices of a la/yer of their o/n choice& f they cannot afford the ser*ices of a la/yer, they /ill be pro*ided /ith one by the go*ern$ent for free& Thereafter, both appellants $anifested to - n*estigator irgilio :ablico their intentions to gi*e their state$ents e*en in the absence of counsel& Despite the $anifestations of the appellants, n*estigator :ablico re0uested for the legal ser*ices of 6tty& Bonifacio anansala to act as counsel for appellant ontinente and 6tty& Feli$on orpu" for appellant taas& -ignificantly, n*estigator :ablico disclosed that appellant ontinente conferred /ith 6tty& anansala in his presence for about half an hour before the in*estigation started& [(5] %e*ertheless, the appellant 3ontinente4 $aintained his decision to gi*e a state$ent e*en in the absence of counsel& 6s proof thereof, the appellant signed [(1] the :agpapatunay that contains an epress /ai*er of his constitutional rights in the presence of 6tty& anansala /ho also signed the sa$e as counsel of the appellant& @ith respect to appellant taas, 6tty& Feli$on orpu" testified that his legal ser*ices /ere re0uested on t/o 324 occasions to act as counsel for appellant taas after the latter purportedly $anifested his intention to /ai*e his rights to re$ain silent and to counsel during the in*estigation& 6tty& orpu" stated that he conferred /ith the appellant before the in*estigations and eplained to hi$ his rights under the constitution and the conse0uences of /ai*ing said rights& 6fter the eplanation, appellant taas decided to sign the :agpapatunay, /hich are entirely /ritten in Tagalog, a dialect /hich he understands, in his /ritten confessions respecti*ely dated 6ugust 29, 19#9 and 6ugust )5, 19#9 stating that his constitutional rights to re$ain silent and to counsel /ere eplained to hi$E that he fully understood the sa$eE and that he /as /illing to gi*e a /ritten confession e*en /ithout the assistance of counsel& [(2] 6ppellants Donato ontinente and .uanito taas li+e/ise i$pugn their respecti*e /ritten state$ents& They allege that the state$ents appearing therein /ere supplied by the - in*estigator& - n*estigator :ablico ho/e*er, categorically denied on rebuttal the allegations of the appellants& :ablico disclosed that during his in*estigations of the appellants on separate occasions he si$ultaneously type/rote his 0uestions to the appellants including their ans/ers thereto /hich are done entirely in Tagalog, thus lea*ing no roo$ for :ablico to fabricate an ans/er& 6fter the in*estigation, he allo/ed the appellants to read their respecti*e confessions, [()] a fact that /as ad$itted by appellant ontinente& [((] Thereafter, the appellants *oluntarily affied their signatures on e*ery page of their /ritten confessions& =n .uly 1#, 19#9 appellant ontinente appeared before ity :rosecutor alicano of !ue"on ity and affir$ed under oath the truth of his state$ents by affiing his signature on the left hand portion of e*ery page of his /ritten confession& [(H] >i+e/ise, appellant taas, acco$panied by 6tty& orpu", affir$ed under oath the truth of his state$ents in his /ritten confessions by affiing his signature on e*ery page thereof before the ad$inistering officer& [(G] n a desperate atte$pt to cast doubt on the *oluntariness of his confessions, appellant ontinente clai$s that he /as under pressure to read entirely his /ritten
confession before he affied his signature thereon& The unsubstantiated clai$ of the appellant is belied by his o/n ad$ission that he /as treated fairly during the in*estigation, thus8 ourt8 :roceed& !8 %o/, r& @itness, since the ti$e you /ere arrested on .une 1G, 19#9 until this ti$e, you said you /ere staying in a$p ra$e, a$ correctM 68 Aes, sir& !8 6nd fro$ the ti$e you /ere arrested up to this ti$e, you /ere ne*er har$ed by anybody in a$p ra$e, that is also correctM 68 %o, sir& !8 n fact, fro$ the ti$e you /ere arrested /hen that blindfold /as re$o*ed, you /ere treated fairly, a$ correctM 68 Aes, sir&[(7]
There is also no basis to support the clai$ of appellant taas that he /as tortured into gi*ing a confession and /as threatened by the - agents to ad$it the truth of the sa$e before the ad$inistering officer& This ourt held that /here the appellants did not present e*idence of co$pulsion or duress or *iolence on their personsE /here they failed to co$plain to the officers /ho ad$inistered the oathsE /here they did not institute any cri$inal or ad$inistrati*e action against their alleged inti$idators for $altreat$entE /here there appeared to be no $ar+s of *iolence on their bodies and /here they did not ha*e the$sel*es ea$ined by a reputable physician to buttress their clai$, all these should be considered as factors indicating *oluntariness of confessions& [(#]
t has been established by the e*idence that 6tty& File$on orpu" /as present during both occasions that appellant taas /as being in*estigated by n*estigator irgilio :ablico in a$p ra$e and e*en acco$panied the said appellant before the ad$inistering officer& 6ppellant taas did not present any e*idence in court to buttress his bare clai$ despite the fact that a doctor /as su$$oned for his chec+ up i$$ediately upon his arri*al in anila after he /as pre*iously arrested in Da*ao ity& [(9]
n particular, appellant .uanito taas ad$itted in his /ritten confession [H(] dated 6ugust 29, 19#9 that he /as an acti*e $e$ber of the %e/ :eopleCs 6r$y 3%:64 and perfor$ed different functions $ainly in the pro*ince of Da*aoE that he /as one of the t/o other $e$bers of the %:6 /ho /ere sent to anila so$eti$e in arch 19#9E that appellant stayed in er*ille, :arana0ue before $o*ing to an apart$ent in -antolan, :asig together /ith certain ic+y and her husband Ronnie, =nie, Bosyo and BernieE that one day before the a$bush on ol& Ro/e he 3taas4 /as told by Ronnie to ta+e part in a $a;or operation by the %:6E that he 3taas4 /as not infor$ed by Ronnie about the identity of their supposed targetE that on the follo/ing day, Ronnie and the appellant boarded a dar+ bro/n Toyota car together /ith certain ?dgar and .a$esE that he 3taas4 /as seated directly behind the dri*er beside ?dgar and .a$es /hile Ronnie sat beside the dri*erE that they /ere ar$ed /ith '1G rifles /hile Ronnie /as ar$ed /ith an ulti$aE that after se*eral $inutes their car reached a ;unction 3circle4 and /as running alongside a dar+ gray carE that he fired auto$atic shots to/ard the dar+ gray car only after his co$panions started firing at the said carE and that after the a$bush they dro*e bac+ to their apart$ent in -antolan, :asig /hile they /ere being follo/ed by a bac+ up car allegedly being occupied by certain >i/ay, Fred and ?ddie& 6ppellant taas also identified in his /ritten confession [HH] dated 6ugust )5, 19#9 the gray itsubishi car that they a$bushed on 6pril 21, 19#9 and the car that they used on the sa$e date of a$bush& =n the other hand, the /ritten state$ent [HG] dated .une 17, 19#9 of appellant Donato ontinente re*eals that he had been a $e$ber of se*eral re*olutionary groups before beco$ing a full fledged $e$ber of the o$$unist :arty of the :hilippines 3::4 under the :olitical 6ssassination Tea$ 3:6T4 headed by a certain IitE that the ob;ecti*e of their tea$ /as pri$arily to conduct sur*eillance on foreigners and diplo$atsE that he did not +no/ ol& .a$es Ro/e prior to the shooting incident on 6pril 21, 19#9E that his participation in the a$bush /as $erely for ha*ing conducted a sur*eillance of the *icinity of the .-6 in To$as orato 6*enue in !ue"on ityE that he gathered certain data, specifically8 the nu$ber of people and *olu$e of *ehicles around the area, the $easure$ent of the streets, as /ell as the distance of the .-6 o$pound fro$ To$as orato 6*enueE that his sur*eillance acti*ity /as continued by certain Freddie 6bella and Taddy /ho are also $e$bers of the :6TE and that he ca$e to +no/ the identity of the *icti$ of the a$bush on 6pril 21, 19#9, through Freddie 6bella /ho infor$ed hi$ t/o days after the incident& 6ppellants ontinente and taas $ay not *alidly repudiate the counsels /ho rendered the$ legal assistance during their respecti*e in*estigations as biased and inco$petent& t $ust be e$phasi"ed that both appellants ne*er signified their desire to ha*e la/yers of their o/n choice& n any case, it has been ruled that /hile the initial choice of the la/yer in cases /here a person under custodial in*estigation cannot afford the ser*ices of the la/yer is naturally lodged in the police in*estigators, the accused really has the final choice as he $ay re;ect the counsel chosen for hi$ and as+ for another one& 6 la/yer pro*ided by the in*estigators is dee$ed engaged by the accused /here he ne*er raised any ob;ection against the for$erCs appoint$ent during the course of the in*estigation and the accused thereafter subscribes to the *eracity of his state$ent before the s/earing officer& [H7]
f 6tty& anansala and 6tty& orpu" decided against ad*ising the appellants not to gi*e their state$ents in*ol*ing the a$bush, the said la/yers /ere $erely co$plying /ith their oaths to abide by the truth& The counsel should ne*er pre*ent an accused fro$ freely and *oluntarily telling the truth& [H#] @hether it is an etra;udicial state$ent or testi$ony in open court, the purpose is al/ays the ascertain$ent of truth& [H9] @hat is sought to be protected /ith the constitutional right to counsel is the co$pulsory disclosure of incri$inating facts& The right is guaranteed $erely to preclude the slightest coercion as /ould lead the accused to ad$it so$ething false, not to pro*ide hi$ /ith the best defense& [G5] @e agree /ith the trial courtCs obser*ation that the retention by appellant ontinente of 6tty& Bonifacio anansala as his counsel until the early stages of his case in the lo/er court and his subse0uent decision to engage the legal ser*ices of 6tty& anansalaCs relati*e, 6tty& eferino anansala, /ho represented the said appellant throughout the proceedings in the absence of the for$er bespea+s of the trust he had for the said la/yer& =n the other hand, /hile it is ad$itted that 6tty& Feli$on orpu" ser*ed in the $ilitary as prosecutor in the ?fficiency and -eparation Board of the ar$ed forces, such fact is not sufficient to ad;udge the said la/yer as biased against the appellant 3taas4 in the absence of any concrete e*idence to that effect&The defense also failed to adduce substantial e*idence to support a finding that 6tty& orpu" /as short of being a *igilant and effecti*e counsel for the said appellant& oreo*er, the testi$ony of prosecution eye/itness eria$ Julueta confir$s to a large etent the state$ents $ade by the appellants in their /ritten confessions& Julueta positi*ely identified appellant .uanito taas as a$ong the persons on board a car, directly behind the dri*er, /hose body /as half eposed, /hile firing at the car of ol& .a$es Ro/e at the corner of To$as orato -treet and Ti$og 6*enue in !ue"on ity& -he also testified that she had seen appellant Donato ontinente on at least three 3)4 occasions at the carinderia outside the .-6 co$pound& -he $istoo+ appellant ontinente for a tricycle dri*er on 6pril 17, 19#9 /hile the latter /as si$ply /al+ing around the pre$ises& The second and third encounters /ith the appellant 3ontinente4 too+ place on 6pril 1# and 19, 19#9 /hile the said appellant /as standing inside the sa$e carinderia& The defense assails the propriety of the pre'trial identification by eria$ Julueta of appellants Donato ontinente and .uanito taas as pointedly suggesti*e&
serious inconsistencies and glaring o$issions in the testi$ony of the eye/itnessE and /here the /itness only identified the suspect after he /as arrested and the /itness /as infor$ed by the police that the suspect /as one of the +illers& t should be pointed out that the abo*e rulings of the ourt are based on the circu$stances peculiar to each of the abo*ecited cases that do not eactly obtain in the cases at bench& t is accepted legal precept that persons react differently to a gi*en situation& [G(] n the sa$e /ay, certain /itnesses to an unfolding cri$e $ay run or sca$per to safety /hile others /ould re$ain transfied and stri*e to identify the perpetrators thereof& 6s found by the trial court, Julueta testified in an honest and straightfor/ard $anner that she /as about to cross the To$as orato -treet on her /ay to the .-6 o$pound in !ue"on ity to attend a practicu$ in the .-6 ess
6RT& 2(#& urder&'' 6ny person /ho, not falling /ithin the pro*isions of 6rticle 2(G shall +ill another, shall be guilty of $urder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death if co$$itted /ith any of the follo/ing attendant circu$stances8 1& @ith treachery, ta+ing ad*antage of superior strength, /ith the aid of ar$ed $en, or e$ploying $eans to /ea+en the defense or $eans or persons to insure or afford i$punity& 2& n consideration of a price, re/ard or pro$ise& )& By $eans of inundation, fire, poison, eplosion, ship/rec+, stranding of a *essel, derail$ent or assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, or by $eans of $otor *ehicles, or /ith the use of any other $eans in*ol*ing great /aste and ruin& (& =n occasion of any of the cala$ities enu$erated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earth0ua+e, eruption of a *olcano, destructi*e cyclone, epide$ic or other public cala$ity&
H& @ith e*ident pre$editation& G& @ith cruelty, by deliberately and inhu$anly aug$enting the suffering of the *icti$, or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse&
The trial court erroneously found that the appellants allegedly conspired in the co$$ission of the cri$es charged in the instant cri$inal cases& @hile it is clear that the appellants did not e*en +no/ each other, the lo/er court opined that the 6le Boncayao Brigade is such a large organi"ation that there is great li+elihood that the participants of the *arious stages of the cri$e are un+no/n to each other& To ;ustify its position, it cited the ruling in the case of :eople *s& eroni$o [GG], thus8
@hen the defendants by their acts ai$ed at the sa$e ob;ect, one perfor$ing one part and the other perfor$ing another part as to co$plete it, /ith a *ie/ to the attain$ent of the sa$e ob;ect, and their acts, though apparently independent, /ere in fact concerted and cooperati*e, indicating closeness of personal associations, concerted action and concurrence of senti$ents, the ourt /ill be ;ustified in concluding that said defendants /ere engaged in a conspiracy& @e disagree& 6rticle # of the Re*ised :enal ode pro*ides that a conspiracy eists /hen t/o or $ore persons co$e to an agree$ent concerning the co$$ission of a felony and decide to co$$it it& To pro*e conspiracy, the prosecution $ust establish the follo/ing three 3)4 re0uisites8 314 that t/o or $ore persons co$e to an agree$entE 324 that the agree$ent concerned the co$$ission of a cri$eE and 3)4 that the eecution of the felony /as decided upon& [G7] @hile conspiracy $ust be pro*en ;ust li+e any cri$inal accusation, that is, independently and beyond reasonable doubt, [G#] the sa$e need not be pro*ed by direct e*idence and $ay be inferred fro$ the conduct of the accused before, during, and after the co$$ission of the cri$e& [G9] The case against appellant Donato ontinente is pri$arily anchored on the /ritten state$ent [75] that he ga*e during the in*estigation of these cases& The pertinent portions of his /ritten state$ents are 0uoted hereunder, to /it8 T8 +a/ baCy naging full fledged $e$ber ng :artidoM -8 %ito pong =+tubre 19##& T8 -ino na$an ang iyong +ini+ilalang puno sa inyong :artidoM -8 anito po iyon& ayroon +a$ing sariling grupo na +ung ta/agin ay :6T& 6ng ibig sabihin nito ay :=>T6> 6--6--%6T=% T?6& 6ng a$ing puno ay tinata/ag na$ing := o :olitical =fficer& 6ng susunod sa +anya ay ang T> o Tea$ >eaderE tapos po ay ang ice Tea$ >eaderE at $ga $ie$bro na nagsasaga/a ng acti*ities tulad ng ga/aing edu+asyon, sur*eillance at intelligence&
T8 6no ang $ga ala$ $ong ob;ecti*es ng inyong tea$M
-8 , 6ng $ga ob;ecti*es po na$in ay $agsaga/a ng sur*eillance sa $ga foreigner o diplo$at& Iinu+uha na$in ang plate nu$ber ng +anilang $ga sasa+yan, $a+e, $odel at +ulay nito at ito ay a$ing tinitipon&
T8 %a+i+ilala $o ba itong si ol& .a$es Ro/e ng &-& 6r$y na nagtrabaho sa .-6M -8 %a+ilala +o po la$ang siya ng $apabalitang patay siya sa a$bush sa $ay $alapit sa .-6 noong bu/an ng 6bril 19#9&
T8 6no ang iyong naging partisipasyon sa pag+a+apatay nitong si ol& Ro/eM -8 -ur*eillance po la$ang ang a+ing naging papel dito& T8 :aano $o na$an isinaga/a itong pag'sur*eillance +ay olonel Ro/eM -8 %agpunta po a+o sa area ng .-6 doon sa To$as orato 6*enue, !& & at nag$an$an doon tung+ol sa da$i ng tao at sasa+yang du$adaan tu/ing tanghali& nala$an +o din ang la/a+ ng +alsada at layo ng Ti$og 6*enue sa gate ng .-6& -a report +o ay sinabi +o na $ga ani$ 3G4 na ha+bang ang lu/ag ng To$as orato 6*enue, $adalang ang daan ng tao at sasa+yan at ang layo ng Ti$og 6*enue sa gate ng .-6 ay $ay tatlong poste o apat na poste la$ang& T8 6ng pagrereport $o bang ito ay gina/a $o ng *erbal la$angM -8 erbal la$ang po& T8 Ianino +a na$an nagreportM -8 Iay Ia Freddie 6bella po&
T8 Ba+it $o natiya+ na ang 6BB ang nagsaga/a ng pag'a$bush +ay olonel Ro/eM -8 Dala/ang 324 ara/ po $atapos ang pag'a$bush +ay ol& Ro/e ay nag+ita +a$ing dala/a ni Freddie sa a$ing bahay& -a pag+i+ita na$ing iyon ay i+inu/ento niya sa a+in ang $ga pangyayari&
t should be e$phasi"ed that conspirators are the authors of the cri$e, being the ones /ho decide that a cri$e should be co$$itted& -trictly spea+ing, a person $ay not be considered a conspirator by his $ere subse0uent assent or cooperation in the co$$ission of a cri$e absent a clear sho/ing, either directly or by circu$stantial e*idence, that he participated in the decision to co$$it the sa$eE [71] in /hich case, his culpability /ill be ;udged based on the etent of his participation in the co$$ission of the cri$e& n the case at bench, appellant Donato ontinente is liable for the cri$es charged in these cri$inal cases only as an acco$plice under 6rticle 1# of the Re*ised :enal ode& n order that a person $ay be considered an acco$plice in the co$$ission of a cri$inal offense, the follo/ing re0uisites $ust concur8 3a4 co$$unity of design, i&e&, +no/ing the cri$inal design of the principal by direct participation, he concurs /ith the latter in his purposeE 3b4 he cooperates in the eecution of the offense by pre*ious or
si$ultaneous actsE and 3c4 there $ust be a relation bet/een the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person charged as acco$plice& [72] The prosecution failed to establish, either directly or by circu$stantial e*idence, that appellant Donato ontinente /as pri*y to any conspiracy to carry out the a$bush on ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er on that fateful $orning of 6pril 21, 19#9& The e*idence adduced disclose that the participation of appellant ontinente /as $ade only after the plan or decision to a$bush ol& Ro/e /as already a fait accompli & ontinente /as $erely assigned to the *icinity of the .-6 o$pound in To$as orato -treet, !ue"on ity, before the shooting incident to gather certain data, specifically the nu$ber of people and *olu$e of *ehicles in the area, the $easure$ent of the streets, and the distance of the .-6 o$pound fro$ To$as orato -treet& -ubse0uently, ontinente reported his findings to Freddie 6bella and that thereafter the latter had ta+en o*er the acti*ity& -ignificantly, appellant ontinente /as not e*en present at the scene of the cri$e on 6pril 21, 19#9& The error of the trial court in its appreciation of appellant ontinenteCs participation in the cri$es charged lies in its apparent confusion regarding the distinction bet/een a conspirator and an acco$plice& n *ie/ of its effect on the liability of appellant ontinente, the distinction bet/een the t/o concepts as laid do/n by this ourt in the case of :eople *s& de era, et al& [7)]needs to be reiterated, thus8
onspirators and acco$plices ha*e one thing in co$$on8 they +no/ and agree /ith the cri$inal design& onspirators, ho/e*er, +no/ the cri$inal intention because they the$sel*es ha*e decided upon such course of action& 6cco$plices co$e to +no/ about it after the principals ha*e reached the decision, and only then do they agree to cooperate in its eecution&onspirators decide that a cri$e should be co$$ittedE acco$plices $erely concur in it& 6cco$plices do not decide /hether the cri$e should be co$$ittedE they $erely assent to the plan and cooperate in its acco$plish$ent& onspirators are the authors of the cri$eE acco$plices are $erely their instru$ents /ho perfor$ acts not essential to the perpetration of the offense& @ith respect to appellant .uanito taas, ho/e*er, the trial court correctly found that the e*idence against hi$ /hich consist of his /ritten confession and the straightfor/ard and credible testi$ony of prosecution eye/itness eria$ Julueta, e*en if ta+en independently, are sufficient to con*ict hi$& 6ppellant taas categorically ad$itted in his /ritten confession that he and his co$panions fired at the gray itsubishi car of ol& .a$es Ro/e at the corner of Ti$og 6*enue and To$as orato -treet in !ue"on ity& oreo*er, prosecution /itness eria$ Julueta positi*ely identified appellant taas as one of the persons she sa/ on board a car /ho fired at a gray car at the sa$e ti$e and place /here ol& Ro/e and his dri*er /ere a$bushed& The shooting of ol& .a$es Ro/e and his dri*er, .oa0uin inuya, /as attended by treachery& There is treachery /hen the offender co$$its any of the cri$es against
person, e$ploying $eans, $ethods or for$s in the eecution thereof /hich tend directly and especially to ensure its eecution, /ithout ris+ to hi$self arising fro$ any defense /hich the offended party $ight $a+e& [7(] The e*idence clearly sho/s that the $ode of eecution /as deliberately adopted by the perpetrators to ensure the co$$ission of the cri$e /ithout the least danger unto the$sel*es arising fro$ the possible resistance of their *icti$s& 6ppellant taas and his co$panions, /ho /ere all ar$ed /ith po/erful firear$s, /aited for the car of ol& Ro/e /hich /as being dri*en by .oa0uin inuya at the corner of Ti$og 6*enue and To$as orato -treet in !ue"on ity& @ithout any /arning, appellant taas and his co$panions suddenly fired at the said car upon reaching the said place& a/ in the latter case, the $ai$u$ of the penalty to be i$posed on appellant taas is the $ediu$ period of prision $ayor and the $ini$u$ shall be /ithin the range of the penalty net lo/er to that prescribed by the Re*ised :enal ode for the offense, that is, prision correccional & =n the other hand, being an acco$plice to the cri$es of $urder and atte$pted $urder, the penalty to be i$posed on appellant Donato ontinente shall be the $ediu$ periods of reclusion temporal and prision correccional , respecti*ely& 6pplying the ndeter$inate -entence >a/ in both cases, the $ai$u$ of the penalty to be i$posed on appellant ontinente as an acco$plice to the cri$e of $urder is the $ediu$ period of reclusion temporal and the $ini$u$ shall be prision mayor , /hile the $ai$u$ of the penalty to be i$posed on the said appellant as an acco$plice to the cri$e of atte$pted $urder is the $ediu$ period of prision correccional and the $ini$u$ shall be arresto mayor &
HEREFORE, the appealed Decision of the Regional Trial ourt, Branch ##, in ri$inal ases %os& !'#9'(#() and !'#9'(#(( is hereby =DF?D, as follo/s8
n ri$inal ase %o& !'#9'(#(), appellants .uanito taas and Donato ontinente are found >TA beyond reasonable doubt of the cri$e of $urder, as principal and as acco$plice, respecti*ely& 6ppellant taas, as principal, is hereby sentenced to suffer i$prison$ent of reclusion perpetua& 6ppellant ontinente as acco$plice, is hereby sentenced to suffer i$prison$ent for t/el*e 3124 years of prision mayor , as $ini$u$, to fourteen 31(4 years and eight 3#4 $onths of reclusion temporal , as $ai$u$& Both appellants taas and ontinente are =RD?R?D to pay ;ointly and se*erally the a$ount of :H5,555&55 to the heirs of the *icti$, ol& .a$es Ro/e, by /ay of ci*il inde$nity& n ri$inal ase %o& !'#9'(#((, appellants .uanito taas and Donato ontinente are found >TA beyond reasonable doubt of the cri$e of atte$pted $urder, as principal and as acco$plice, respecti*ely& 6ppellant taas, as principal, is hereby sentenced to suffer i$prison$ent for si 3G4 years of prision correccional , as $ini$u$, to nine 394 years and si 3G4 $onths of prision mayor , as $ai$u$& 6ppellant ontinente, as acco$plice, is hereby sentenced to suffer i$prison$ent of si 3G4 $onths of arresto mayor , as $ini$u$, to t/o 324 years and four 3(4 $onths of prision correccional , as $ai$u$& SO ORDERED.