People of the Philippines v. Fernando Bucayo y Mojica a.k.a. Fernando Cunanan a.k.a. "Bucayo," Hector Bucayo y Mojica a.k.a. Ryan Cunanan

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, finding no error committed by the trial court in arriving at the assailed decision, the same is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION directing accused-appellants to pay the heirs of EDISON the sum of P50.000.00 as moral damages, and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, in light with current jurisprudence. [3] On accused-appellants' assertion that the testimony of Jonathan was not credible because he could not have witnessed everything that was happening because he was himself under attack, the CA observed that, although Jonathan was himself under attack and was terrified, it was not impossible that he had opportunity to see the attack on Edison. The CA also opined that there was no reason why Jonathan should lie about what he saw. Taken into account the fact that the trial court had been convinced of the testimony of Jonathan and having observed the demeanor of the witness, the CA was not inclined to disturb the RTC's findings on the credibility of Jonathan. Against the positive and categorical testimony of an eyewitness, the CA said, the denial by the accused of their involvement on the crime must fail. As to the argument that conspiracy among the accused had not been proven, the CA further observed that direct proof of conspiracy is not essential to establish the conspiracy. It said that the existence of the assent of minds of the co-conspirators may be inferred from proof of facts and circumstances which, taken together, indicate that they are parts of the complete plan to commit the crime. The CA cited the following chain of events which tend to establish that there was a community of design among the accused to perpetrate the crime: (1) Fernando and his group blocked the path of Jonathan and Edison as the two were on their way home; (2) they all participated in the attack on Jonathan and Edison; (3) when Jonathan had a chance to flee, Hector dragged him back; and (4) Hector and Jayson exchanged blows with Jonathan and Edison as Fernando kept hitting Edison with a steel chair causing the death of Edison. After having filed their Notice of Appeal, accused-appellants manifested that they were re-pleading and adopting their Brief for Accused- Appellants as their Supplemental Brief. The lone issue presented before this Court is: THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANTS GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE THE PATENT WEAKNESS OF THE PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE. The appeal has no merit. Essentially, accused-appellants' claim, that the testimony of Jonathan ought not to be believed simply because Jonathan could not have witnessed the mauling of Edison since he himself was under attack, has no basis. Both the trial and appellate courts found Jonathan's testimony credible and their findings should be given full faith and credit. Time and again, we said that the findings by the RTC should be respected as the trial court judge was in the best position to determine the witness' credibility. It is