G.R. No. 250584 - Calera vs. Hoegh Fleet Services Philippines, Inc.

On January 14, 1977, at the Cummins Diesel guest house compound in Cebu City, a series of events unfolded involving the victim, Ernesto Pulmares, and company personnel.
Alfredo Pavon, the quality control manager, dropped off two secretaries at the guest house before meeting the victim “after office hours.”
A red taxi cab was observed parked at the compound gate, occupied by Romeo Saavedra, Henry Fernandez, and Reynaldo Quilala.
The group proceeded together in the taxi, and upon reaching the Kan-Irag Hotel around 9:00 p.m., a commotion was noted in the lobby. Witnesses later testified that one of the occupants signaled with a “thumbs-up” as events unfolded.

Inside the hotel, a disturbance occurred where Ernesto Pulmares, who was with Pavon, was stabbed.
Pulmares attempted to voice his pain by saying “May tama ako” as he clutched his bleeding abdomen.
Alfredo Pavon rushed the wounded Pulmares to Chong Hua Hospital, where a surgical operation was performed.
Although the operation initially saved Pulmares, he later developed uremia and was transferred to Cebu Doctor’s Hospital, ultimately succumbing to his injuries on January 18, 1977.

Testimony from multiple witnesses, including Eleazar Asuncion (a Cummins manager) and Elenita Diores (a housemaid), placed Saavedra and his companions at key scenes:

Diores observed Saavedra and Quilala loitering at the guest house and noted their inquiry regarding “Ernie,” identifying the deceased.
Pavon identified Saavedra as having given a thumbs-up gesture during the commotion.

Exhibit “C” (and “C-1”) – a communication alleged to have been sent by Saavedra to Henry Fernandez, urging him not to “make any confession” and assuring him that his name would not be mentioned.
Exhibits “D”, “D-1”, and “E” to “E-4” – extra-judicial confessions of Fernandez.
Exhibits “H” and “H-1” – statements where Saavedra allegedly admitted to being with Fernandez on the night of the incident, though claiming they were simply out for a drinking session.

A separate information filed by the District State Prosecutor formally charged Saavedra, Quilala, and Fernandez with murder, emphasizing aggravating circumstances such as treachery, nighttime, superior strength, and the use of a motor vehicle.

The three accused were arrested and arraigned on August 18, 1977; however, only Saavedra and Fernandez were eventually apprehended, while Quilala remained at large.
Henry Fernandez pleaded guilty and was separately sentenced to a term of reclusion temporal, though his plea was later used against Saavedra as evidence of a conspiracy.
Saavedra’s testimony was marked by inconsistencies:

He claimed that his association with Quilala and Fernandez was merely coincidental and based on camaraderie rather than a prearranged murder plot.
He denied having any prior knowledge of the victim or being involved in planning the murder, asserting that his presence on the scene was incidental.
Saavedra refuted the allegations regarding his “thumbs-up” gesture and any verbal instructions that might have encouraged Fernandez’s actions.

Although Saavedra attempted to explain his behavior and even provided an alibi suggesting he joined in only for a drinking session, his failure to report the incident immediately and subsequent contradictory statements raised doubts among the lower court.

Whether the evidence is sufficient to establish that Romeo Saavedra was part of a conspiracy or common design to murder Ernesto Pulmares.

Whether the mere presence of Saavedra at the scene constitutes participation in the conspiracy.
Whether the communications (e.g., Exhibit “C”) and ambiguous gestures (e.g., the “thumbs-up”) amount to an overt act of complicity.

Whether Saavedra’s actions in failing to immediately report the incident and in providing inconsistent testimony can be treated as incriminating evidence of his involvement.
Whether the judicial instructions and the nature of the evidence—particularly the reliance on Fernandez’s testimony and extra-judicial confessions—establish beyond reasonable doubt Saavedra’s guilt as a co-conspirator (or accomplice) in the murder.