6/30/2015

G.R. No. 94065

TodayisTuesday,June30,2015

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
SECONDDIVISION

G.R.No.94065December2,1991
ROBERTOSITONyENSALADA,petitioner,
vs.
HON.COURTOFAPPEALSandPEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,respondents.

PARAS,J.:p
Cantherebeaconspiracyinafreeforallfight?Thisistheissuewearefacedwith.
At around 11:00 o'clock in the evening of February 9, 1985, Norberto Notar, a barangay tanod of the place, was
outside the Hair Works Beauty Salon located near the corner of A. Francisco and Chromium Streets, Sta. Ana,
Manila.1AlsointhevicinitywereaccusedappellantRobertoSiton,JoeyCalip,nephewofNotar,andAndresBorbon,aresidentofthearea.2Subsequently,a
groupofseventoeightyoungmen,includingRoylanHolgado,passedby,walkingtowardsChromiumStreet.

A brief exchange of words occurred between Norberto Notar and Holgado. Subsequently, a freeforall ensued
between the group of Holgado on one hand, and Norberto Notar, Joey Calip, Andres Borbon, and the accused
appellant,RobertoSiton,onanother.
Attheendofthemelee,bothHolgadoandNotarsufferedstabwounds.Holgadosufferedtwostabwounds,oneof
whichwasfatal,causinghisdeath.HeexpiredlateratthePhilippineGeneralHospital. 3 Notar was confined at the Manila
DoctorsHospitalforastabwoundonhisleftchestbutwaslaterreleasedafterrecovering.4

ProsecutionwitnessBernardoFerrertestifiedthatataround10:30o'clockonthenightofFebruary9,1985,hewas
withGerryFloresatthecornerofAquaMarinaandA.FranciscoStreetswhentheirfriendsfromTondo,numbering
aboutsevenarrivedandinvitedthemtoaValentine'sparty.Whentheydeclined,thegroup,ledbyhisfriend,Roylan
Holgado,proceededtowardsChromiumStreet.Afterfiveminutes,theyheardshoutscomingfromthedirectionof
ChromiumStreet.Thus,FerrerandFloresproceededtoChromiumStreet.5ThetrialcourtsummarizedwhatBernardoFerrersaw:
Whileapproachingtheplace,Bernardo(Ferrer)sawAndresBorbonhitRoylanwithapieceofwoodon
thehead,RobertoSiton,alias"BertingTura",whowasbehindRoylanstabbedRoylanwithanicepick
ontherighthiponce.Thereafter,JoeyCalipalsostabbedRoylanontherightsideofthewaistlinewith
a kitchen knife once. Afterwards, Roylan fell and was taken to Philippine General Hospital by his
companions and Bernardo. The victim, Roylan was thereafter treated by the doctors but the same
provedfutileashedied.6
MarioPahita,acashierattheHairWorksBeautySalon,testifiedforthedefense.Heaverredthatataround11:00
o'clockonthenightofFebruary9,1985,hewasinfrontofhisbeautyparlorwithtwoofhisbeauticians,Joyand
Rolly. Notar was also with them. They then saw a group of around seven to eight young men, including Roylan
Holgado,walkpastthem,towardsChromiumStreet.Afterawhile,theyheardsoundsofwhatseemstobestones
beinghurledattheroofsofhouses.Then,theysawthesamegroupofmenretreatingtowardstheirdirection.Notar
askedHolgadowhatthenoisewasallabout.Thelatterreplied:"Walayon."Thegroup,whichappearedtobedrunk
andheavyeyed,wasadvisedbyNotartogohomeasthepolicemightpassby.7Thelowercourtsummeduptheensuingevents:
ThegroupofRoylanresentedtheadviceofNorbertoandsuddenly,thelatterwasboxedbyoneofthe
companions of Roylan. Later on, all of them ganged up on him. Roylan stabbed Norberto with an
icepick.Ontheotherhand,JoeyCalip,nephewofNorberto,stabbedRoylantwo(2)timesattheright
sideofhisstomachwithabladedweapon.8
Thedefensepresentedanotherwitness,MarioBaul,amemberofHolgado'sgroupwhichfiguredinthefreeforall.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/dec1991/gr_94065_1991.html

1/5

6/30/2015

G.R. No. 94065

Hetestifiedthathe,togetherwithRoylanHolgadoandsomefiveothers,wereontheirwaytohishouseon
ChromiumStreetwhentheyweremetbyNorbertoNotar.Afterutteringsomewordswhichhe(Baul)didnot
understand,NotarstoodupandboxedHolgado.Thenafreeforallensued.Hedidnotseetheaccusedappellant
RobertoSiton.9
Forhispart,accusedappellantRobertoSitongaveanalibiandasseveratedthatintheeveningofFebruary9,1985,
he was in Cainta, Rizal, in the house of his sister, Miguela Siton Soliman, a public school teacher. He was there
fromFebruary8,1986andstayeduntilFebruary15,1986,toborrowmoneyfromhissister.10
The trial court gave credence to the positive identification made by Bernardo Ferrer and disregarded the alibi of
Roberto Siton, who was charged to have conspired with others in murdering the victim, Roylan Holgado.
Consequently,theRegionalTrialCourtofManila,BranchXI, 11 in a decision rendered on March 1, 1988, found Roberto Siton guilty
beyondreasonabledoubtofthecrimeofhomicide.Thedispositiveportionofthedecisionreads:

WHEREFORE,theCourtfindstheaccusedguiltybeyondreasonabledoubtofthecrimeofhomicide
and hereby sentences him to suffer the indeterminate penalty of TWELVE (12) YEARS of prision
mayorasaminimumtoSEVENTEEN(17)YEARSandFOUR(4)MONTHSofreclusiontemporalas
maximum, less preventive period of his confinement, and to pay the heirs of Roylan Holgado the
amountofP30,000.00asindemnityforthelatter'sdeath.
SOORDERED.12
Unsatisfiedwiththejudgmentofthetrialcourt,accusedappellantRobertoSitonelevatedhiscasetotheCourtof
Appeals.TheSixthDivisionoftheCourtofAppeals 13 upheldtheangle ofconspiracyandina decisionpromulgatedonMarch 27, 1990,
affirmedintotothedecisionofthetrialcourt.Theappellatecourtdisposed:

WHEREFORE,findingthedecisionofMarch1,1988oftheRTCManila,BranchII,inCriminalCase
No. 8541920, to be in accordance with law and evidence, the same is hereby AFFIRMED in all
respects.Costsagainstaccusedappellant.
TheOfficeoftheCityFiscalofManilaisherebydirectedtofilethenecessaryinformationagainstthe
persons,whoseidentitiesarenowknown,althoughtheirpresentwhereaboutsarestillunknown,and
who,accordingtotheinformationfiledinthepresentcase,conspiredandconfederatedwitheachother
andwiththeaccusedappellantRobertoSitoninkillingthedeceasedRoylanHolgado.
SOORDERED.14
Upholding its findings of the existence of a conspiracy, the appellate court 15 denied the accusedappellant's motion for
reconsiderationina
resolution16promulgatedonJune26,1990.

AccusedappellantRobertoSitonnowcomesbeforeusandarguesthattheCourtofAppealserredinfindingthat
thereisconspiracyinafreeforall.Consequently,iterredinfindingtheaccusedappellantguiltybeyondreasonable
doubtofthecrimeofhomicide.
Theaccusedappellantcontendsthatinafreeforallfight,theprotagonistsdonothavethesoleobjectiveofmauling
orkillingaparticularindividual.Rather,theprotagonistswereexcitedbytheirreflexestofacetheiropponentsasthe
exigencyofthefightingdemands.
UnderArticle8oftheRevisedPenalCode,"conspiracyexistswhentwoormorepersonscometoanagreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it." In the case at bar (as testified by the defense
witness,MarioPahita),thedeceasedwasstabbedbyJoeyCalipnotbecauseofaconcertedactionbutinretaliation
only to the act of the deceased in stabbing his relative, Norberto Notar. Certainly, there was no indication of a
commonpurposeordesigntoconstituteconspiracy.
Theaccusedappellantthenassertsthatevenassumingthathehadjoinedinattackingthevictim,"suchactalone
doesnotsatisfytherequirementofaconspiracybecausetheruleisthatneitherjointnorsimultaneousactionisper
sesufficient proof of conspiracy. It must be shown to exist as clearly and convincingly as the commission of the
offenseitself."
Therebeingnoconspiracy,theaccusedappellantsubmitsthathisliabilityshouldbelimitedtohisparticipationonly,
assumingarguendothatheindeedparticipated.
TheSolicitorGeneral,however,maintainsthatconspiracywaspresentbecausethemalefactors,includingRoberto
Siton,actedinconcertpursuanttothesameobjective,i.e.,thekillingofRoylanHolgado,whichobjectivetheywere
in fact able to attain. Settled is the rule that for conspiracy to exist, the evidence need not establish the actual
agreementwhichshowsthepreconceivedplan,motive,orinterest,orpurposeinthecommissionofthecrime.17
Conspiracyneednotbeprovedbydirectevidenceasthesamecanbeinferredfromtheactsoftheconspiratorsto
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/dec1991/gr_94065_1991.html

2/5

6/30/2015

G.R. No. 94065

theeffectthatatthetimetheoffensewascommittedtheparticipantshadthesamepurposeandwereunitedinits
execution. 18 Thus, when the defendants by their acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and another performing another part so as to
completeit,withaviewtotheattainmentofthesameobject,andtheiracts,thoughapparentlyindependent,wereinfactconcertedandcooperative,indicating
closenessofpersonalassociation,concertedaction,andconcurrenceofsentiments,conspiracyispresent.19

Wemodifythefindingsoftheappellatecourt.
We affirm the assailed decision with respect to the findings that an alibi, when faced with positive identification,
deservesscantconsideration.Bethatasitmay,webelieveconspiracywasabsent.
Wellentrenched is the doctrine that when an accused has been positively identified by clear, explicit, and
convincing evidence, his defense of alibi can not be given weight. Accordingly, we affirm the presence of the
accusedappellantinthefreeforallfightwhichresultedinthedeathofRoylanHolgado.
Alibi, as we have repeatedly held, must yield to and can not prevail over the positive identification made by the
prosecution'switness.20ThetestimonyofdefensewitnessMarioBaulastotheabsenceofaccusedappellantcannotlikewisebegivencredenceashe
testifiedthathewassomewhatdrunkduringtheincident.21

Ontheissueofconspiracy,weholdthatitwasnotestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt.
Aconspiracyexistswhentwoormorepersonscometoanagreementconcerningthecommissionofafelonyand
decidetocommitit.22Inthepresentcase,thereisnoshowingthattherewasapreviousagreementrelatingtothecommissionofthecrime,itappearing
thatthemeetingbetweenthegroupofNotarandthegroupofHolgadowascasualandunarranged,andtheaggressionensuedatthespurofthemoment.23
Althoughproofoftheagreementmaybeinferredfromtheactsandconductoftheconspiratorsdisclosingacommonunderstandingamongthemwithrespectto
thecommissionoftheoffense,24wehavealsoinvariablyruledthatliketheoffenseitself,conspiracymustbeprovedbeyondreasonabledoubt.25

Conspiracy, like any other ingredient of the offense, must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. 26 Indeed,

conspiracywasnotestablishedsincetheattackonRoylanHolgadowasnotagreeduponbeforehand.Themeetingbetweenthetwogroupswasnotplannedin
advance.Itwasunexpectedandunarrangedthefracaswasinstantaneous,perhapscausedbythearroganceofNotarandtheintoxicationofHolgado(sincethe
threeallegedeyewitnessesgaveconflictingtestimoniesonwhatexactlyprecipitatedthefreeforall).

ItisevidentfromtherecordsthattherecouldnothavebeenapreconceivedplantoattackHolgadoastherewasa
freeforall.Thisisveryclear.ProsecutionwitnessBernardoFerrertestifiedthus:
WITNESS:
Therewasafreeforall,sir,"Naglabulabo."
COURT:
ThecompanionsofRoylanHolgado,numberingsix(6)alsoengagedwith[sic]thefistcuff
fightwiththegroupofNorbertoNotar?
WITNESS:
Yes,YourHonor.27
In fact, the attack on Holgado could not have been preplanned as Holgado had with him six other men
comparedtoNotar'scompanywhichwascomprisedofonlytheaccusedappellantSiton,Calip,andBorbon.
For Notar's group to intentionally single out Holgado would be dangerous as it would expose them to the
probableassaultofHolgado'ssixothercompanions.TheattackonHolgadowasaspontaneousreactionin
responsetoasituationtheNotargroupfounditselfin.
Asearlyas1929,thisCourthasruledinPeopleofthePhilippineIslandsv.Caballero,etal.28thatitisnotenoughthatthe

attackbejointandsimultaneousitisnecessarythattheassailantsbeanimatedbyoneandthesamepurpose.Aconspiracymustbeshowntoexistasclearlyand
convincinglyasthecrimeitself.

WereiteratedthisrulinginPeoplev.Bartolay(1971)29andinPeoplev.Dorico(1973).30Oncemore,werelyonit.Consequently,wehold
thatconspiracywasnotestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt.

Sinceconspiracyhasnotbeenproven,theresponsibilityoftheaccusedisindividualandtheaccusedmustbedealt
withindividually.31
Going back to the testimony of prosecution witness, Bernardo Flores, it is plain and clear that accusedappellant
RobertoSitonstabbedthevictim,RoylanHolgadoonthelatter'srighthip.Therecordspeaksforitself:
ATTY.SEBASTIAN:
Mr.Witness,youstatedthatRobertoSitonaliasBertingTurastabbedRoylanHolgadowithanicepick,
willyoupleaseinformtheHonorableCourtwhatpartofthebodyofRoylanHolgadowasstabbedby
RobertoSitonaliasBertingTura?
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/dec1991/gr_94065_1991.html

3/5

6/30/2015

G.R. No. 94065

WITNESS:(BernardoFlores):
Therighthip,sir.32
ButthestabwoundinflictedbyRobertoSitonwasnonfatal.
ThiswasconfirmedbythemedicolegalofficeroftheWesternPoliceDistrict:
COURT:
WoundNo.1(referringtothepenetratingstabwoundslashingtherightlobeoftheliver,piercingthe
right kidney and grazing the 1st lumbar vertebra, inflicted by Joey Calip as per the testimony of
BernardoFerrer),willyoushowagainwherethevitalorganisaffected.
WITNESS:
Therightlobeoftheliverpiercingthekidney.
xxxxxxxxx
COURT:
ThatwoundNo.1couldbethecauseofdeath?
WITNESS:
Yes,YourHonor.
xxxxxxxxx
COURT:
Could this kind of injury (referring to wound No. 2, a stab wound on the right hip region inflicted by
accusedappellantRobertoSiton)causethedeathofthevictim?
WITNESS:
No,sir.Thisisnonfatal(references,supplied).33
Absentanyevidenceprovingconspiracy,accusedappellantRobertoSitoncannotbeheldliableforhomicidebut
merelyforlessseriousphysicalinjuries,consideringtheextentofthestabwoundheinflictedonthevictim.Itwould
besafetopresumethattheoffendedpartywouldhavebeenincapacitatedforlaborfortendaysormore,orwould
haverequiredmedicalattendanceofthesameperiod,byreasonofthestabwoundonhishipshouldhehavenot
sufferedanyotherinjury(Article265oftheRevisedPenalCode).
WHEREFORE,theappealeddecisionisherebyMODIFIEDbyfindingaccusedappellantRobertoSitonyEnsalada
guiltyoflessseriousphysicalinjuriesandsentencinghimtosufferthepenaltyofimprisonmentoffour(4)monthsof
arrestomayor with the accessory penalties provided by law and to pay the costs. If he has been detained for a
periodlongerthanfour(4)months,hisimmediatereleasefromcustodyisherebyordered,unlessheisbeingheldto
answerforsomeotheroffenseoroffenses.
SOORDERED.
MelencioHerrera,PadillaandRegalado,JJ.,concur.

#Footnotes
1TSN,August12,1986,45.
2TSN,October2,1986,67.
3TSN,April3,1986,12.
4TSN,October16,1986,67.
5TSN,April24,1986,57.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/dec1991/gr_94065_1991.html

4/5

6/30/2015

G.R. No. 94065

6Rollo,21.
7TSN,August12,1986,48.
8Rollo,23.
9TSN,November27,1986,5December2,1987,5.
10TSN,December18,1986,9.
11Hon.ManuelE.Yuzon,PresidingJudge.
12Rollo,29.
13DecisionpennedbyAssociateJusticeJaimeM.Lantin,concurredinbyAssociateJusticesSerafin
Camilon(Chairman)andReginaG.OrdonezBenitez.
14Rollo,63.
15SixthDivisionoftheCourtofAppeals.
16ResolutionpennedbyAssociateJusticeJaimeM.Lantin,concurredinbyAssociateJustices
SerafinCamilon(Chairman)andReginaG.OrdonezBenitez.
17Antoniov.Sandiganbayan,No.L57937,October21,1988,166SCRA595,at602.
18Peoplev.Pineda,No.L72400,January15,1988,157SCRA71,at84Peoplev.Masangkay,No.
L73464,January25,1988,157SCRA320,at329.
19Peoplev.Sunpongco,No.L42665,June30,1988,163SCRA222,at235.
20Peoplev.Mandal,G.R.No.87959,August13,1990,188SCRA526,at530,amongmanyother
cases.
21TSN,December2,1986,5.
22Article8,RevisedPenalCode.
23Peoplev.Resayaga,No.L49536,March30,1988,159SCRA,426at431.
24Peoplev.Saavedra,No.L48738,May18,1987,149SCRA610,at623624.
25Peoplev.Saavedra,supra,at624Castanedav.Sandiganbayan,G.R.No.61243,March16,1989,
171SCRA263,at269Navarov.CA,G.R.No.84423,January31,1989,169SCRA861,at869
Peoplev.Orodio,G.R.No.57519,September13,1988,165SCRA316,at324,amongalitanyof
cases.
26Peoplev.Agda,No.L36377,January30,1982,111SCRA331.
27TSN,April24,1986,8.
28No.31254,Sept.25,1929,53Phil.585,at595596.
29No.L30610,October22,1971,42SCRA1.
30No.L31568,November2,1973,54SCRA172.
31Peoplev.Elizaga,167SCRA516,at523Peoplev.Laurio,G.RNo.95351,August9,1991.
32TSN,April24,1986,11.
33TSN,April3,1986,1114.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/dec1991/gr_94065_1991.html

5/5