People of the Philippines vs Ignacio Cupino, Vicente Dejoras & Ramon Galos

G.R. No 125688
Date March 31, 2000
Facts:
In the evening of August 16, 1989 at around 9:45pm, during the celebration of a certain fiesta in Patag, Cagayan
de Oro City, suspect Mr. Ramon Galos & victim Mr. Gromyko Valiente were having a heated argument. Such
incident was happening in front of a particular store called Dods situated at the crossing of the town of Patag.
Suddenly a fist fight occurred between Mr. Galos and Mr. Valiente. During this instance, the appellants arrived in the
scene. Aftewards, all three individuals (Galos, Cupino and Dejoras) ganged up against and beat up the victim Mr.
Valiente. This resulted for the victim to run away but likewise the three accused pursued him. When Mr. Galos was
able to reach the victim, he suddenly stabbed him twice in his stomach using a small bolo. This caused the victim to
fall down and thus crawl on the floor. Then afterwards, Mr. Cupino pulled the bolo embedded within the victims
body and tried to stab him as well also. But Mr. Dejoras tried to prevent this from occurring by grabbing his friends
hand which held the small bolo. During this process, Dejoras wasnt able to successfully grab hold of his friends
hand but instead caught the knife with its blade. This instantly injured the hand of Mr. Dejoras. But nontheless, Mr.
Cupino proceeded with his intent of stabbing the victim. Then both Galos and Cupino immediately fled the scene.
The victim, Mr. Valiente, was left lying on the floor soaked with his own blood. He was eventually brough to the
hospital but later died. Mr. Dejoras, on the other hand, went to a hospital in order to seek treatment upon the hand
wound he incurred.
Issues: Wether or not Conspiracy existed between the three people who were involved in this
case?
Whether or not both appellant-accused were guilty as charged?
Ruling:
No, in relation with the different facts and statements from the witness (Mr. Bahian) & evidences presented,
it is definite that conspiracy only existed between Mr. Galos and Mr. Cupino. It was obvious that both of them
showed a common intent on killing the victim Mr. Valiente. With Mr. Galos, the deed of conspiracy was seen from
his act of grabbing the hand of the fleeing victim then afterwards stabbing him twice. For Mr. Cupino, he
exemplified a unity of purpose with his co-accused Mr. Galos by pursuing also the wounded victim. Then upon
getting hold of the victim, he also stabbed him twice using the same bolo that Mr. Galos initially utilized. So the
court emphasized that due to the similarity of their deeds, they found that both men conspired to kill Mr. Valiente.
No, only one of the two appellant-accused were guilty as charged. As mentioned earlier, the Court deemed
the acts done by Mr. Cupino as having a clear intent of pursuing and attacking the victim. In this case, he was
rightfully penalized as being Guilty of the Act of Murder and was sentenced with the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
On the part of the other appellant-accused, Mr. Dejoras, the court stated that judging from the facts and
circumstances presented upon them, they find him innocent and therefore must be acquitted. There primary reason is
that Mr. Dejoras was certainly not aware upon the intent of his companions on killing of the victim which reflected a
reasonable doubt as to his knowledge upon such act. This particular reason was held as crucial since it was the first
requisite deemed by them as necessary to make an accused liable as an accomplice of a crime. The aspect of him
inflicting an injury upon the victim wasnt clearly presented and proven upon by the prosecution thus having no
basis for the appellant-accused being liable for even physical injuries.