G.R. No. 245969 - People vs. Catulang y Gutierrez

On or about September 7, 2008, in Caloocan City, Metro Manila, two separate Informations were filed. One charged Manuel Catulang y Villegas, Joel Catulang y Gutierrez, Poly Bertulfo y Delloro, and Crispolo Bertulfo y Delloro with murder, while the other charged Poly with attempted murder.
The murder Information described the accused as armed with bladed weapons (including a bolo, an ice pick, and a screwdriver), allegedly conspiring together, attacking, mauling, and stabbing the victim, Romeo Cantiga y Mantalaba, with evident premeditation, treachery, and abuse of superior strength.
The attempted murder Information alleged that Poly, using a bladed weapon, commenced the crime by attacking Rodel Cagus y Apostol, but was interrupted by timely intervention of neighbors.

Reported that while watching television, she and her husband heard a commotion outside.
Observed Manuel emerging from his house, hitting her husband with a dos por dos.
Identified three men (Poly, Joel, and Crispolo) dragging the victim inside Manuel’s house, where the victim was later seen being mauled, kicked, and stabbed by multiple assailants using a bolo, screwdriver, and wood.
Noted that she could do nothing out of fear and sought the help of bystanders.

Witnessed Romy being hit, then saw Joel and Poly dragging Romy into the steel gate of Manuel’s house.
Reported that he informed Lydia about the attack and later learned that Romy had died.

Conducted the autopsy and observed multiple stab wounds, including three determined stab wounds with two penetrating the lungs.
Identified additional traumatic injuries: abrasions, contusions, punctured wounds, rib fractures, and hematoma, supporting a theory of mauling.

Testimonies of Purok Leader Eutequio Seming Jr., PO1 Mark Andrew Bartolome, and Norberto Deciembro further corroborated the presence of multiple assailants, the state of intoxication of the accused, and evidence recovered at the scene (such as the bolo and screwdriver).

The defense contended that on the same evening the accused were having a drinking session in Manuel’s house when events escalated.
According to them, the victim, Romy, inadvertently instigated the confrontation by pushing the gate and provoking Manuel, leading to a physical struggle.
It was alleged that during a grapple between Romy and Manuel, Poly intervened and stabbed Romy out of fear that Romy might kill them.
Crispolo claimed to have been in the comfort room and Joel testified that he was asleep after drinking, suggesting minimal or no participation in the actual assault.

Accused Manuel later succumbed to breathing difficulties and died on November 2, 2014, which led to the dismissal of charges against him under Article 89(1) of the RPC.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City, Branch 128, on June 1, 2016, convicted Joel, Poly, and Crispolo for murder and imposed reclusion perpetua, along with awarding various damages to the victim’s heirs.
The RTC found evidence of conspiracy and abuse of superior strength based on the collective actions during the attack.
An appeal was subsequently filed by Joel, Poly, and Crispolo before the Court of Appeals (CA), which on October 19, 2018, affirmed the RTC’s decision for murder against Poly and Crispolo while upholding the conviction based on the demonstration of abuse of superior strength and joint participation.

The accused raised several issues on appeal, challenging the conclusions on self-defense, defense of a relative, voluntary surrender, conspiracy, and the extent of their individual culpability.
The appellate records reviewed testimonial inconsistencies and the physical evidence, noting that some defense claims, such as self-defense, were belied by the facts—especially as the victim had been disarmed and was unarmed at the time of the fatal blows.
The appellate court ultimately acquitted Joel on the ground of reasonable doubt regarding his active participation, while sustaining the conviction of Poly and Crispolo for murder, with modifications to the award of damages.

The alleged error in disregarding the claims of self-defense and defense of a relative, particularly on behalf of Manuel and Poly, due to lack of evidence of ongoing unlawful aggression by the victim.
The contention that the trial court failed to properly recognize the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender by the accused.
The challenge to the finding of conspiracy among the accused, arguing that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to prove a unified plan or intent.
The error in not determining the individual culpability of each of the accused, which would differentiate the extent of their participation in the crime.
The accusation that the court based its conviction on inconsistencies among the prosecution’s witness testimonies.
The challenge to the finding that the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength applied, given the circumstances of the altercation.
The overarching issue: whether the guilt of the accused was legally and factually proven beyond reasonable doubt.