People v. Doctolero

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
LUDOVICO C. DOCTOLERO alias "ECOY," CONRADO C. DOCTOLERO alias "CONDRING," and VIRGILIO C.
DOCTOLERO alias "VERGEL," accused-appellants.
Doctrine: ACCOMPLICES
FACTS:
On November 08, 1970, the three brothers Ludovico, Conrado and Virgilio Doctolero, armed
themselves with bolos and went to the house of Marcial Sagun and conspired and mutually aided one
another with intent to kill and with evident premeditation and treachery, with abuse of superior
strength and with extreme cruelty, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack,
assault, hack, stab and strike Lolita de Guzman Oviedo, Epifania Escosio and Jonathan Oviedo (the child
of Lolita and only 1 ½ years old) and immediately thereafter, the same accused while already on the
road, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, with intent to kill and with evident
premeditation and treachery, attack, assault, hack and stab Marcelo Doctolero, thereby inflicting upon
him multiple mortal wounds which caused his death.
The three accused successfully murdered Lolita and Epifania, while her son Jonathan was
inflicted with slight physical injuries as he was attacked while being breastfed by Lolita. Principal
witnesses Marcial Sagun, his wife Maria, and her sister Pacencia testified that upon reaching a crossing
of the road in Bo. Binday they met the accused Ludovico Doctolero who, without warming and without
cause or reason, Marcial’s left shoulder with his left hand and struck him which the latter evaded and
wrestled with the possession of the bolo while Maria ran away.
On the other hand, Pacencia’s testimony, gave clarity to what occurred while Marcial and
Maria were in the fields and was still just on their way home. While cleaning the yeard of her uncle,
Marcelo, she witnessed how the three accused Ludovico, Conrado and Virgilio threw stones at Marcial’s
house and called for him to come out. With Epifania and Lolita inside, the three men marched inside and
heard the two women scream. Leaving the house, Marcelo Doctolero, their uncle who lived next door,
went to them, ignorant of what they just did, and told them why they can't be patient and forget, but
the three accused replied ‘Vulva of your mother, we will also kill you.' Then they struck Marcelo
Doctolero several times with their bolos. And when their father Antonio Doctolero (Marcelo’s half-
brother) arrived, he also struck him with a bolo on the head and all of them ran away.
The Court thus finds the three accused guilty for the murders of Epifania, Lolita, and Marcelo
with Ludovico as principal, while Conrado and Virgilio as accomplices. Ludovico is sentence to suffer
THREE LIFE IMPRISONMENTS (Cadena Perpetua) and the additional penalty of 4 Months and 1 Day to 6
Months of arresto mayor, for inflicting slight physical injury to (sic) the minor child, Jonathan Oviedo.
The two accomplices were sentenced to suffer the penalty of 10 years and 1 Day of prision mayor to 17
Years and 4 months of reclusion temporal.
ISSUES:
1. WON the two co-accused were correctly held as accomplices.
2. WON conspiracy is present in the offense- holding the two co-accused criminally liable.
3. WON the Court erred in the penalty imposed for the physical injuries inflicted on Jonathan
Oviedo.
4. WON the death of the other appellant, Virgilo, terminates his liability of the offense.
RULING:
1. YES. While Conrado argues that he did not participate in the commission of the acts, and
provides an alibi, he fails to prove this with any sufficient evidence. While the testimony of a
co-conspirator or an accomplice is admissible, such testimony comes from a polluted source
and must be scrutinized with great caution as it is subject to grave suspicion. This
uncorroborated denial of his participation cannot overthrow the positive and categorical
testimony of the principal witnesses of the prosecution.
Furthermore, from the nature, number, and locations of the many wounds sustained by the two
women and child, it could not have been possible for Ludovico's two brothers Virgilio and Conrado
(assuming that they did not go inside the house) not to hear either the screams of pain of their brother's
victims, all three of them were also armed during this event. It is, therefore, reasonable to believe that
the two appellants, Conrado and Virgilio, merely stood by as their brother Ludovico Doctolero was
murdering the two deceased women, ready to lend assistance.
We have held that where one goes with the principals, and in staying outside of the house while
the others went inside to rob and kill the victim, the former effectively supplied the criminals with
material and moral aid, making him guilty as an accomplice.
2. NO. While it was not shown that there exists conspiracy, there is still ample evidence of
their criminal participation, there is only doubt on the nature of their liability or the degree
of which they participated, thus, the courts should favor the milder form of liability or
responsibility which is that of being mere accomplices
While appellants contend that the murders occurred as a consequence of a sudden thought or impulse,
which would negate a common criminal design in their minds. This pretension must be rejected since
one can be an accomplice even if he did not know of the actual crime intended by the principal
provided he was aware that it was an illicit act.
3. YES. The child required medical attention for fifteen (15) days, hence the liability of
appellants therefor is for less serious physical injuries punished with arresto mayor under
Article 265 of the Revised Penal Code. There being no modifying circumstances, a penalty of
twenty (20) days of arresto menor should be imposed for said offense on appellant Conrado
Doctolero as an accomplice.
4. NO. While his criminal liability is terminated, his civil liability still exists.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the trial court is MODIFIED and judgment is hereby rendered IMPOSING on
appellant Conrado Doctolero three (3) indeterminate sentences often (10) years of prision mayor to
seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal each for the death of Epifania Escosio,
Lolita de Guzman Oviedo and Marcelo Doctolero, and a penalty of twenty (20) days of arresto menor for
the less serious physical injuries inflicted on Jonathan Oviedo. Appellant Conrado Doctolero and the
estate of Virgilio Doctolero are ORDERED to indemnify, in the sum of P50,000.00 for each set or group of
heirs, the respective heirs of Epifania Escosio, Lolita de Guzman Oviedo and Marcelo Doctolero, and to
pay one-half (1/2) of the costs.

People v. Doctolero

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People v. Doctolero

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

People v. Doctolero

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

You might also like