View full case

PEOPLE v. MARDY AQUINO

FACTS:

The accused, Mardy Aquino, Mario Aquino, and Juanito Aquino, were charged with murder and frustrated murder in two Informations. The prosecution alleged that the accused, armed with a knife, conspired and attacked Jackie N. Caguioa, causing his death, and also attacked Ernesto Caguioa, inflicting serious injuries but failing to cause his death. The accused pleaded not guilty.

During the trial, the prosecution presented evidence to support their version of the events, which involved a previous altercation between Ernesto and Inyong, leading to the accused attacking Ernesto and his son Jackie. On the other hand, the defense claimed that Ernesto and Jackie were the initial aggressors and that the accused acted in self-defense. Juanito specifically denied any involvement.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found all the accused guilty of murder and frustrated murder, based on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. The RTC sentenced them to reclusion perpetua and awarded damages to the victim's family.

Accused-appellants Mario and Mardy appealed the RTC's decision to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed their conviction but modified the penalty for frustrated murder and the amount of damages awarded. The CA held that the prosecution established the intent to kill and the presence of conspiracy. The CA reduced the amount of actual damages based on the receipts submitted by the prosecution.

Accused-appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the sufficiency of evidence to prove their guilt for murder and frustrated murder beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the accused-appellants are liable for murder or homicide.

  2. Whether abuse of superior strength is present as a qualifying circumstance.

  3. Whether the wounds sustained by the victim were fatal or could have caused his death.

  4. Whether the accused-appellants are guilty of attempted homicide or homicide.

  5. Whether accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide for the killing of Jackie Caguioa.

  6. Whether accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted homicide.

  7. Whether the monetary awards for civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages, and temperate damages are proper.

RULING:

  1. The accused-appellants may be held liable only for homicide. The elements of murder are established but the presence of abuse of superior strength as a qualifying circumstance is not proven. Therefore, their guilt must be limited to homicide.

  2. Abuse of superior strength is not present as a qualifying circumstance. The prosecution failed to show a relative disparity in age, size, strength, or force between the victim and the assailants. Mere superiority in numbers does not automatically indicate abuse of superior strength. The encounter between the victim and the assailants was unplanned and unpremeditated, therefore there was no conscious effort to use or take advantage of any superior strength.

  3. The prosecution failed to prove that the victim's wounds would have certainly resulted in his death without medical treatment. The attending physician testified that the wounds were not fatal and the possibility of death from such wounds is remote. Therefore, the wounds did not have the potential to cause the victim's death.

  4. In the absence of proof that the victim's wounds were fatal, the Court declares that the accused-appellants' guilt is limited to the crime of attempted homicide.

  5. Accused-appellants Mardy Aquino and Mario Aquino are found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of HOMICIDE for the killing of Jackie Caguioa and are sentenced to suffer the penalty of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. They are ordered to pay the heirs of Jackie Caguioa the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages.

  6. Accused-appellants Mardy Aquino and Mario Aquino are also found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE and are sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as maximum. They are ordered to pay Ernesto Caguioa the amount of P20,000.00 as civil indemnity, P20,000.00 as moral damages, and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The elements of murder include the killing of a person, the accused being the one who killed him, the presence of qualifying circumstances, and that the killing is not parricide or infanticide.

  • Evidence of abuse of superior strength requires a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor/s that is plainly advantageous to the aggressor/s and deliberately used to facilitate the commission of the crime.

  • The appreciation of abuse of superior strength depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties.

  • Mere superiority in numbers does not automatically indicate abuse of superior strength.

  • An information must contain all the elements required by the Rules on Criminal Procedure, including the specific allegation of qualifying circumstances for murder.

  • Both qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be specifically alleged in the information to be appreciated as such.

  • In order to establish a charge of homicide, the prosecution must prove that the injuries sustained by the victim were the proximate cause of his death.

  • In determining the penalty for attempted homicide, the imposable penalty shall be lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.

  • Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty shall be taken from the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code, and the minimum term shall be within the range of the penalty one degree lower.

  • In the absence of any modifying circumstance, the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty for attempted homicide shall be taken from the medium period of the penalty one degree lower, and the minimum term shall be taken from the range of the lower penalty.

  • A person is guilty of homicide when he/she causes the death of another person, even if without any intention to cause harm, if the act causing the death is unlawful (Criminal Law).

  • Attempted homicide, a frustrated stage of the crime of homicide, refers to an act done with intent to kill, commenced but not completed by reasons independent of the will of the perpetrator (Criminal Law).

  • Civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages, and temperate damages are proper forms of monetary awards in cases involving death or physical injuries (Civil Law).