Case Digest (G.R. No. 95355)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Eduardo Eddie Robedillo, Artemio Artem Yepes, Artemio Artem Novio, and Anacleto Yontong Novio, G.R. No. 95355, February 24, 1998, Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court.The information charged that on May 30, 1988 in Tolosa, Leyte, the four accused, with decided intent to kill, conspiring and mutually helping one another and taking advantage of superior strength, attacked and dealt fatal wounds to Martiano Cinco with bladed weapons. Trial proceeded against all except Artemio Artem Novio, who remained at large. The Regional Trial Court (8th Judicial Region, Palo, Leyte) convicted Eduardo Eddie Robedillo, Artemio Artem Yepes and Anacleto Yontong Novio of murder and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua, and ordered them jointly and severally to indemnify the heirs of the victim P30,000.
The prosecution presented two eyewitnesses. Sammy Cinco, the sixteen-year-old son of the victim, testified that after a party at Felicisimo Novio’s house he saw his father flee pursued by the four accused armed with bolos; the victim was captured in a nearby ricefield, surrounded, pleaded for mercy, and then was repeatedly hacked and stabbed until he fell. Eufrocina Cinco, the victim’s common-law wife, testified she saw the four surrounding and hacking her husband, and that Robedillo continued to assault the victim even after the others left; she also testified as to a possible motive (a prior complaint against Robedillo for pig theft). Dr. Alicia S. Songalia performed the post-mortem, documenting eleven wounds and diagnosing death by hypovolemic shock due to multiple stab wounds.
At trial, Artemio Yepes offered an alibi; Robedillo did not testify; Anacleto Novio denied responsibility, claimed he tried to stop the chase, and invoked past incidents to explain hostility against him. The trial court convicted the three named appellants. A death certificate shows Artemio Yepes died in September 1989; Anacleto Novio jumped bail and remained at large despite arrest warrants; Robedillo remained in custody but had not been committed to the Bureau of Corrections as required. Pursuant to Rules 124 and 125, the Court noted the appeals of the deceased and the fugitive should be dismissed, leaving only Robedillo’s appeal. The princi...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Procedural: Should the appeals of accused-appellants who died or who are at large be dismissed pursuant to the Rules of Court?
- Substantive: Did the trial court err in convicting the appellants of murder instead of the lesser offense of homicide—specifically, was the qualifying circumstance of use of superior strength established despite the a...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)