Case Digest (G.R. No. 172707)
Facts:
People of the Philippines prosecuted the eleven accused-appellants Halil Gambao y Esmail, Eddie Karim y Uso, Edwin Dukilman y Suboh, Tony Abao y Sula, Raul Udal y Kagui, Theng Dilangalen y Nanding, Jaman Macalinbol y Katol, Monette Ronas y Ampil, Nora Evad y Mulok and Thian Perpenian y Rafon for kidnapping for ransom under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, arising from the abduction of Lucia Chan on 12–14 August 1998 in Pasay City and the demand for P400,000; police rescue and arrests followed on 14 August 1998. The RTC convicted them on 16 October 1998 and the Court of Appeals affirmed with modification on 28 June 2005; the case was elevated to this Court for automatic review.
Issues:
- Was the evidence sufficient to sustain the convictions for kidnapping for ransom?
- Were the guilty pleas to a capital offense improvidently made and, if so, do they vitiate the convictions?
- What is the proper degree of culpability and penalty for Thian Perpenian a.k.a. Larina Perpenian given her age at the time of the offense?
- What civil liabilities and apportionment should be imposed on the convicted parties?
Ruling:
The Court affirmed with modifications the convictions: the principal accused-appellants were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to Reclusion Perpetua, without eligibility for parole; Thian Perpenian was convicted as an accomplice and sentenced under an indeterminate term of six months and one day of Prision Correccional to six years and one day of Prision Mayor, and ordered released for having served her sentence. The Court increased minimum civil indemnities and damages to P100,000.00 each and apportioned total civil liability of P300,000.00 as P288,000.00 for the principals (joint and several) and P12,000.00 for the accomplice.
Ratio:
The Court gave full weight to the trial court's credibility findings and the positive identification of the victim, finding the prosecution adduced independent and credible evidence of conspiracy and participation beyond the guilty pleas. Although the record showed an imperfect searching inquiry when accused changed pleas to a capital offense as required by precedents such as People v. Oden, the convictions rested on independent evidence and thus survived despite improvident pleas. Regarding Perpenian, the Court treated her as an accomplice because her presence, conduct and lies demonstrated knowledge and moral support; applicable statutes—R.A. No. 9346 (abolishing death penalty) and R.A. No. 9344 (juvenile justice)—governed the modification of penalties and suspension considerations.
Doctrine:
- Trial court findings on witness credibility command great respect and will not be disturbed absent arbitrariness.
- (Get Pro to unlock 6 more doctrines)