PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
AUSENCIO COMILLO, JR., LUTGARDO COMILLO andROMULO ALTAR, accused-appellants
G.R. No. 186538
November 25, 2009
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

FACTS:

APPEAL from a decision of the Court of Appeals.

On 18 December 1999, at about 8:30 p.m., herein victim Pedro C. Barbo bought cigarettes from
a store located on Escalo Street, Barangay 11, Llorente, Eastern Samar. While Pedro was walking on the
said street on his way home, appellant Ausencio Comillo Jr, the former’s elder brother, appellant
Lutgardo Comill and Romulo Altar approached Pedro and asked the latter for cigarettes. Pedro gave all
his cigarettes to appellants Ausencio and Lutgardo. As regards appellant Romulo, Pedro told him to wait
as he would buy cigarettes in the nearby store. While Pedro was walking towards the store, appellant
Ausencio suddenly embraced and held the shoulders of Pedro. At this juncture, appellants Romulo and
Lutgardo went in front of Pedro. Appellant Romulo then hit Pedro on the forehead with a ukulele
(small guitar). Afterwards, appellant Lutgardo stabbed Pedro on the left part of the stomach. Appellant
Ausencio pushed Pedro to the ground and told the latter, “You can go home now as you have already
been stabbed.” Appellants then immediately fled the scene.

Pedro was rushed to nearest hospital and was able to mention the names of his assailants
(Molong, Seksek and Lote). Later, Pedro died due to the stab wound, which penetrated his intestine and
blood vessel. Appellants were then charged with and arrested for the killing of Pedro. The suspects then
presented their alibis. The RTC convicted the 3 of murder and them to death and to pay civil indemnity
of 50,000 pesos. The motion for reconsideration was denied and the case was raised to the CA who
affirmed the RTC decision but reduced the penalty to reclusion perpertua and to pay for civil indemnity
(50,000) exemplary damages (25,000) and moral damages (50,000). The appellants then filed a notice of
appeal.

ISSUE:

1. Whether or not the appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the murder of the
victim?
2. Whether or not treachery was an aggravating circumstance in the crime?

RULING:

1. YES, the SC found the testimonies of Joselito and Marcos credible, they saw what happened
and positively identified the assailants. The statement of both witnesses also corroborated,
there is also no ill motive on their part. The medico legal report also supplemented the
statements. The alibis and self defense was also not proven in court.
2. No, the 3 conspired and committed the act and when Ausencio embraced Pedro to restrain
him is treachery and used superior strength in numbers but treachery was already a
considered as a qualifying circumstance.
the Decision of the Court of Appeals, dated 24 June 2008, in CA-G.R. CEBCR-HC No. 00503, is
hereby AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua is imposed on each of the appellants and they are
jointly and severally liable for the aforementioned damages.
2. the award of exemplary damages is increased to P30,000.00.
3. temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00, in lieu of actual damages, is hereby
awarded to the heirs of Pedro.