People vs. Garchitorena

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
ARNORLD GARCHITORENA Y CAMBA A.K.A “JUNIOR”, JOEY PAMPLONA A.K.A “NATO” AND JESSIE GARCIA Y ADORINO, accused-appellants.

G.R. No. 175605
August 28, 2009

FACTS:

On September 22, 1995, at around 9:00 in the evening, Dulce Borero along with his brother Mauro Biay y Almarinez was selling “balut” at Sta. Inez Almeda Subdivision, Brgy. Dela Paz, Biñan, Laguna.

Dulce Borero was about seven (7) arms length away from her brother Mauro Biay.

Accused Jessie Garcia called Mauro Biay and as Mauro Biay approached Jessie, the latter twisted the hand of Mauro and Jessie’s companions (co-accused) Arnold Garchitorena and Joey Pamplona began stabbing Mauro repeatedly with a shiny bladed instrument. Witness saw her brother Mauro struggling to free himself while being stabbed by the (3) accused, until her brother slumped face down on the ground.

Arnold instructed his two co-accused to run away. Borero claims she wanted to shout but nothing came out from her mouth. Witness went home to call for her elder brother Teodoro Biay, but when they return to the scene the victim was no longer there as he had been brought to the Perpetual Help Hospital.

Trial Court: Guilty, Court of appeals: Affirmed, Supreme Court: Affirmed and Modifications.

ISSUE:

Is there conspiracy shown in the case?

HELD:

Yes, accuse appellants were together in performing the concerted acts in pursuit of their common objective. Jessie Garcia grabbed the victim’s hands and twisted his arms; in turn, Joey Pamplona, together with Arnold Garchitorena, strangled Mauro Biay and straddled the Mauro Biay on the ground, then stabbed him.

Direct proof is not essential for conspiracy, for it may be inferred from the acts of the accused prior to, during or subsequent to the incident. Accused-appellant Garcia also argues that there was no conspiracy, as “there was no evidence whatsoever that he aided the other two accused-appellants or that he participated in their criminal designs.” We are not persuaded. In People v. Maldo, 307 SCRA 436 (1999) we stated: “Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Direct proof is not essential, for conspiracy may be inferred from the acts of the accused prior to, during or subsequent to the incident. Such acts must point to a joint purpose, concert of action or community of interest. Hence, the victim need not be actually hit by each of the conspirators for the act of one of them is deemed the act of all.”

All conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the intent and the character of their participation, because the act of one is the act of all. Where there is conspiracy, as here, evidence as to who among the accused rendered the fatal blow is not necessary. All conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the intent and the character of their participation, because the act of one is the act of all.

HELLO!
You can help law students and barristas by contributing to our collection. Please upload your case digests, reviewers or other relevant materials HERE.

For attribution or removal, contact us.