PEOPLE VS.

VICTOR
181 SCRA 818
G.R. No. 75154-55 / February 6, 1990
Ponente: Melencio-Herrera, J.

FACTS:
Guneda resides in Barangay Ilaya with Victor and his wife. When Victor
went to Boljoon to visit his wife Guneda met him at the market place and
proposed to him a plan to rob the residence of an American named Castle
and the cottage of Turner, an American Peace Corps Volunteer assigned in
the Municipality of Boljoon The two agreed to execute their plan on Oct. 16,
1984. As planned, Victor went to Boljoon in the afternoon of October 16,
1984, together with Montebon, who brought with him a .38 caliber
homemade revolver. Upon entering Turner's cottage, Montebon shot him at
the back of his head upon instruction of Guneda, who wanted the American
killed because the latter knew him. After killing Turner, the trio ransacked
the cottage of Turner's personal belongings. Victor had already surrendered
voluntarily and upon interrogation, Victor verbally admitted being one of
those who killed Turner. From there, Victor led the team to the house of
Montebon he was places under arrest. While items were being retrieved in
Montebon’s house, he remained silent even as Victor remarked, in his
presence and several other persons including his wife and a certain Serafin,
that they were the very articles they took from the cottage of Turner when
they killed him. During the Preliminary Investigation of the case, both
Victor and Montebon, assisted by a counsel de oficio, pleaded "guilty" to the
charges for Robbery with Homicide and Illegal Possession of Firearm and
Ammunitions. Thereafter the two accused who were duly informed of their
constitutional rights, both acknowledged the truth and correctness of their
respective sworn statements taken by PC Investigator. Upon arraignment,
Roger Victor duly assisted by counsel de officio, entered a plea of "guilty" to
Robbery but "not guilty" to Homicide. Roberto Montebon and Ceferino
Guneda, also duly assisted by their respective counsel, entered pleas of "not
guilty". Only Guneda appealed the decision of the RTC assailing that the
extra-judicial confessions made by his co-accused as inadmissible.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Victor’s extra-judicial confessions may be admitted.

RULING:
Yes. Section 27, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court refers to the extra-judicial
statement or admission of a conspirator. When such statement is confirmed
at a trial, it ceases to be hearsay. It becomes instead, a judicial admission
being testimony of an eyewitness admissible in evidence against those it
implicates. The extra-judicial confession of Roger Victor was re-iterated and
affirmed by him in open court, during the trial. Thus, such confession
partakes of the nature of a judicial testimony admissible in evidence not
only to the declarant but even against his co-accused. In determining the
weight and sufficiency of the testimony of a self-confessed co-conspirator
implicating his co-accused, it has been held that such testimony cannot by
itself and without corroboration be considered as proof to a moral certainty
that the latter had committed or participated in the commission of the
crime. It is required that the testimony be substantially corroborated by
other evidence in all its material points. It is also required that such
testimony be credible. Guided by the requirements of credibility and
corroboration on material points in the appreciation of the evidence on
record, the SC held that the testimony of Roger Victor is sufficient to
warrant the conviction of accused-appellant Ceferino Guneda