Case Summary (G.R. No. 175831)
Modification of Eduardo Valdez’s Conviction
On January 18, 2012, the Supreme Court found that the Informations failed to allege the elements of treachery. It downgraded Eduardo’s conviction from three counts of murder to three counts of homicide and imposed indeterminate sentences of 10 years prision mayor minimum to 17 years reclusion temporal maximum for each count, with appropriate damages and costs.
Application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law
The Court applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law: minimum term drawn from prision mayor, maximum from the medium period of reclusion temporal. Eduardo thus qualified for parole in due course, replacing the indivisible reclusion perpetua previously imposed.
Insufficiency of Averment of Treachery
Murder requires factual averment of treachery—acts that directly ensure execution without risk to the assailant. The Informations merely recited shootings with intent to kill and listed “qualified with treachery” as a conclusion of law. Lacking specific facts, treachery was not adequately pleaded, necessitating recalibration of charges to homicide.
Principle of Conspiracy
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons agree to commit a felony; direct proof is unnecessary where inferred from conduct. The Court found Eduardo and Edwin acted in concert: armed approach to a betting station, sequential shootings of three unarmed victims, and flight together on a single motorcycle. Their joint actions demonstrated common purpose and community of interest, binding both to equal liability.
Rule 122 Section 11(a) and Equal Treatment of Co-Accused
Rule 122, Section 11(a) provides that when one of several accused appeals, a favorable appellate decision is applicable to non-appealing co-accused. Jurisprudence extends this benefit even if the co-accused appealed and later withdrew, so long as the new judgment is favorable. Denying Edwin the benefit of Eduardo’s downgraded conviction would contrave
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 175831)
Facts of the Case
- PO2 Eduardo Valdez and his brother Edwin Valdez rode together on a motorcycle to the jai alai betting station of Moises Sayson Jr. in Quezon City, both armed with short firearms.
- They intended to confront Jonathan Rubio, the teller inside the betting booth, calling him to come out.
- Moises approached and was threatened; Eduardo Valdez then fired several shots at Moises at very close range, causing him to fall to the ground.
- Eduardo continued to fire at the fallen Moises. Ferdinand Sayson, Moises’s brother, rushed to aid him and was shot in the head by Edwin Valdez, resulting in a fatal wound.
- Joselito Sayson, the third brother, attempted to flee but was shot twice in the back by Edwin and died upon collapsing near a burger machine.
- The assailants immediately fled together on the same motorcycle after completing the killings.
Procedural History
- Regional Trial Court (Branch 86, Quezon City) trial culminated on January 20, 2005 in convictions for three counts of murder; each accused was sentenced to reclusion perpetua per count and ordered to pay P93,000.00 actual damages, P50,000.00 civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 moral damages to each victim’s heirs.
- On July 18, 2006, the Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions but modified the damages to P50,000.00 civil indemnity, P50,000.00 moral damages, P25,000.00 temperate damages, and P25,000.00 exemplary damages per victim, plus costs.
- Edwin Valdez filed a motion to withdraw his appeal on May 9, 2007; the Supreme Court granted it on October 10, 2007, rendering his appeal closed and terminated.
- PO2 Eduardo Valdez’s appeal was decided by the Supreme Court on January 18, 2012, which modified his convictions to three counts of homicide with indeterminate sentences of 10 years prision mayor (minimum) to 17 years reclusion temporal (maximum) and corresponding damages.
- On March 12, 2012, Edwin Valdez wrote the Court Administrator seeking the benefit of the downgraded judgment under Section 11(a), Rule 122 of the Rules of Court.
- The Solicitor General interposed no opposition in a comment filed September 25, 2012.
- On February 13, 2013, the Supreme Court issued a resolution granting Edwin Valdez the same beneficial judgment.
Evidence and Findings
- Witness testimony uniformly described the assault in a manne