8/10/2016

G.R. No. 85204

TodayisWednesday,August10,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
SECONDDIVISION
G.R.No.85204June18,1990
JORGETAER,petitioner,
vs.
THEHON.COURTOFAPPEALSandTHEPEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,respondents.
LordM.Marapaoforpetitioner.
TheSolicitorGeneralforrespondents.

SARMIENTO,J.:
This is a petition for review on certiorari of the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in "People v.
JorgeTaer,"CAG.R.CRNo.01213, 1datedMay26,1988,whichaffirmedintototheconvictionofJorgeTaerfor
thecrimeofcattlerustlingbytheRegionalTrialCourtofBoholinCriminalCaseNo.3104,2andtheresolutionofthe
samecourtdenyingthepetitioner'sMotionforReconsideration.

After the required preliminary investigation in the 11th Municipal Circuit Court at ValenciaDimiao, in the
province of Bohol, the following information was filed in the then Court of First Instance of Bohol, 14th
JudicialDistrict,BranchIV,atTagbilaranCity:
The undersigned, Third Assistant Provincial Fiscal, hereby accuses Emilio Namocatcat alias
Milio, Mario Cago, Jorge Taer and Cerilo Saludes for the crime of Theft of Large Cattle,
committedasfollows:
Thatonoraboutthe5thdayofDecember,1981,inbarangayLantang,municipalityofValencia,
province of Bohol, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above
namedaccused,conspiring,confederatingtogetherandmutuallyhelpingwitheachother,with
the intent of gain and without the consent of the owner thereof, did then and there willfully,
unlawfullyandfeloniouslytake,stealandleadawaytwo(2)malecarabaoswiththetotalvalue
ofFOURTHOUSANDPESOS(P4,000.00),PhilippineCurrency,belongingtoandownedbyTirso
Dalde and Eladio Palaca to the damage and prejudice of the said offended parties in the
aforestatedamount.
Acts committed contrary to the provisions of Articles 308, 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal
Code, with the aggravating circumstance of nighttime being purposely sought for or taken
advantagebytheaccusedtofacilitatethecommissionofthecrime.
CityofTagbilaran,June1,1982.3
After proper proceedings and trial, Saludes and Cago were acquitted but Taer and Namocatcat were
convicted.Thedispositiveportionofthedecisionofthetrialcourt,datedJuly6,1984,readsasfollows:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds accused Emilio Namocatcat and Jorge Taer GUILTY beyond
doubtofthetheftoflargecattleandappreciatingagainstthemtheaggravatingcircumstanceof
nocturnity and pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 533 each is hereby sentenced to undergo
theindeterminatepenaltyofimprisonmentoffromSIX(6)YEARSandONEDAYTOFOURTEEN
(14) YEARS, TEN (10) MONTHS and TWENTY ONE (21) DAYS, together with the accessory
penalties, and to pay the costs they are entitled to credit for their preventive imprisonment.
AccusedMarioCagoandCiriloSaludesareACQUITTEDforinsufficiencyofevidence.4
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_85204_1990.html

1/5

8/10/2016

G.R. No. 85204

Only Jorge Taer appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals, finding the evidence of the
prosecutionthatconspiracyindeedexistedbetweenEmilioNamocatcatandJorgeTaer,affirmedintotothe
decisionappealedfrom.ButtheaffirmancedidnotaffectEmilioNamocatcatbecause,asadvertedtoearlier,
hedidnotappealhisconvictionbytheRegionalTrialCourt.
Hence,thispetitionforreviewwasfiledbyTaeralone.
Insum,Taerinterposedthesetwinarguments:
1.ThattheextentofhisparticipationdidnotgobeyondtheparticipationoftheoriginaldefendantsCirilo
SaludesandMarioCago.Therefore,hesubmitsthattheacquittalofthesetwobythetrialcourtshouldalso
leadtohisacquittal5
2. That the only evidence proving the alleged conspiracy between him and Emilio Namocatcat was the
confession of his coaccused Emilio Namocatcat. However this should not be considered as admissible
becausethesameishearsayundertheruleofresinteralios
acta.6
Theundisputedfactsasfoundbythetrialcourtshowthat:
In the evening of December 5, 1981, accused Cirilo Saludes slept in the house of his compadre accused
Jorge Taer at Datag, GarciaHernandez, Bohol, whereat he was benighted. At about 2:00 o'clock dawn,
December 6, 1981, accused Emilio Namocatcat and Mario Cago arrived at Taer's house with two (2) male
carabaosownedbyandwhichNamocatcatwantedTaertotend.ThesaidcarabaoswereleftatTaer'splace.
TirsoDaldeandEladioPalacaofLantang,ValenciaBoholdiscoveredinthemorningofDecember6,1981
thattheirrespectivemalecarabaos,3to4yearsold,weremissingatthedifferentgrazinggroundswhereat
theytiedthesametheafternoonpreceding.
Aftersearchinginvainforthecarabaosatthevicinity,DaldeandPalacareportedthemattertothepolice.
On December 15, 1981, one Felipe Reyes of Hinopolan, Valencia, Bohol, informed Dalde that he saw the
latter'slostcarabaoatDatag,GarciaHernandez.ForthwithDaldeandPalacawentonthatdaytoDatagand
there they found their missing carabaos tied to a bamboo thicket near the house accused Taer who was
thennotinthehouseashewasinNapo,GarciaHernandez,attendingthefiestawherehecookedforthe
accused Saludes. Upon query by Dalde and Palaca why their carabaos were found at his place, accused
Taer,accordingtoDaldeandPalacarepliedthatthecarabaosreachedhisplacetiedtogetherwithoutany
personincompany.AccordingtoaccusedTaer,whathetoldDaldeandPalacawasthatthecarabaoswere
broughttohisplacebytheaccusedNamocatcatwhoaskedhimtotellanybodylookingforthemthatthey
juststrayedthereat.
The2carabaosweretakenbyDaldeandPalacafromaccusedTaer'spossessiononthatday,December15.
7

xxxxxxxxx
TheCourtofAppealswouldconsidertheseasproofoftheexistenceofconspiracy:
Altho (sic) accused Taer admitted that before December 6, 1981, he had not met accused
Namocatcatsince1975andhadnotpreviouslytendedanycarabaobelongingtoNamocatcat,it
isunbelievablethatTaerwasnotsuspiciousoftheoriginofthe2malecarabaoswhichtosay
theleastweredeliveredtohimtobetendedunderstrangecircumstances,towit,attheunholy
hour of 2:00 o'clock dawn after a travel of 14 kilometers' in the dead of the night. He
unreservedlyacceptedthechargeoftendingthemwiththeagreementastothesharingofthe
produce out of said carabaos (sic) use. If, as he asserted, Namocatcat left the carabaos with
him with the word that if anybody would look for them he was to tell that the carabaos just
strayedintohisothercarabaos(sic),themoreTaeroughttobemoresuspiciousastotheorigin
ofsaidcarabaos,yet,sincethatdawndeliveryonDecember6,1981,untiltheywereretrieved
fromhispossession,heneverapprisedthebarangaycaptain,livingjust2kilometersawayfrom
his house, about the matter. He continued to hold on to the stolen carabaos until they were
recovered10dayslater.
Ordinarily, one would not hold on to a thing he suspects to be stolen to obviate any criminal
responsibility or implication. But accused Taer did the oppositea clear indication that he and
accused Namocatcat did have some kind of an unlawful agreement regarding the stolen
carabaos.Hedidnotevenrevealimmediatelytotheauthoritiesthatthecarabaosdeliveredto
himbyNamocatcatwerestolenandhetriedhisbesttokeepundercoverNamocatcat'sIdentity.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_85204_1990.html

2/5

8/10/2016

G.R. No. 85204

TheCourt,therefore,findsthatconspiracybetweenaccusedNamocatcatandTaerinthetheftof
thecarabaoshasbeenestablishedbeyonddoubt.8
xxxxxxxxx
We disagree with the findings of the respondent court they are mere suspicions and speculations. The
circumstancesadvertedtoabovedonotestablishconspiracybeyondreasonabledoubt.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement regarding the commission of an
offenseanddecidetocommitit.Althoughthefactsmayshowaunityofpurposeandunityintheexecution
oftheunlawfulobjective,essentialhoweverisanagreementtocommitthecrimeandadecisiontocommit
it.9
Onlyrecentlyweemphasizedtherulethat:
Conspiracy must be established not by conjectures, but by positive and conclusive evidence.
Thesamedegreeofproofnecessarytoestablishthecrimeisrequiredtosupportafindingof
thepresenceofcriminalconspiracy,whichis,proofbeyondreasonabledoubt.10
Thus mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of the act, without cooperation or agreement to
cooperate,isnotenoughtoconstituteoneapartytoaconspiracyabsenttheintentionalparticipationinthe
transactionwithaviewtothefurtheranceofthecommondesignandpurpose.
At most the facts establish Taer's knowledge of the crime. And yet without having participated either as
principal or as an accomplice, for he did not participate in the taking of the carabaos, he took part
subsequenttothecommissionoftheactoftakingbyprofitinghimselfbyitseffects.Taeristhusonlyan
accessoryafterthefact.
Article19oftheRevisedPenalCodestates:
Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without
having participated therein, either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its
commissioninanyofthefollowingmanners:
1.Byprofitingthemselvesorassistingtheoffendertoprofitbytheeffectsofthecrime11
xxxxxxxxx

person who received any property from another, and used it, knowing that the same property had been
stolenisguiltyasanaccessorybecauseheisprofitingbytheeffectsofthecrime."Byemployingthetwo
carabaosinhisfarm,Taerwasprofitingbytheobjectsofthetheft.12
Ontheconspiracycharge,themostcogentproofthattheprosecutioncouldeverraisewastheimplication
madebytheaccusedNamocatcat(hedidnotappealhisconvictiontotheCourtofAppeals)inhisaffidavit
ofconfession.13
However, the settled rule is that the rights of a party can not be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omissionofanother.14
Thetestimony,beingresinteraliosacta,cannotaffectanotherexceptasprovidedintheRulesofCourt.
This rule on res inter alios acta specifically applies when the evidence consists of an admission in an
extrajudicial confession or declaration of another because the defendant has no opportunity to cross
examinethecoconspiratortestifyingagainsthim.15
Since this is the only evidence of the prosecution to prove the conspiracy with Namocatcat, this
uncorroboratedtestimonycannotbesufficienttoconvictTaer.
TheoffenseforwhichTaerisaccusediscoveredbyArticles308,309,and310,asamendedby"MeAnti
CattleRustlingLawof1974.1116Thepenaltyimposedontheprincipalforthecrimeofcattlerustlingis:
Sec. 8. Penal provisions. Any person convicted of cattle rustling as herein defined shall,
irrespective of the value of the large cattle involved, be punished by prision mayor in its
maximumperiodtoreclusiontemporalinitsmediumperiodiftheoffenseiscommittedwithout
violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. If the offense is committed
withviolenceagainstorintimidationofpersonsorforceuponthings,thepenaltyofreclusion
temporalinitsmaximumperiodtoreclusionperpetuashallbeimposed.Ifapersonisseriously
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_85204_1990.html

3/5

8/10/2016

G.R. No. 85204

injuredorkilledasaresultorontheoccasionofthecommissionofcattlerustling,thepenalty
ofreclusionperpetuatodeathshallbeimposed.17
xxxxxxxxx

InasmuchasTaer'sculpabilityisonlythatofanaccessoryafterthefact,underArt.53oftheRevisedPenal
Code, the penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed.
The penalty two degrees lower than that imposed under the first sentence of Section 8 of PD No. 533 is
arrestomayormaximumor4monthsandonedayto6monthstoprisioncorreccionalmediumor2years4
months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months. In addition, the Revised Penal Code provides that when the
penaltiesprescribedbylawcontainthreeperiods,whetheritbeasingledivisiblepenaltyorcomposedof
three different penalties, the courts shag observe the rule that when there are neither aggravating nor
mitigatingcircumstances,theyshallimposethepenaltyprescribedbylawinitsmediumperiod. 18 Hence
the imposable penalty would be prision correccional minimum or 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months
imprisonment.

Sincethemaximumtermofimprisonmentexceedsoneyear,weapplytheIndeterminateSentenceLaw.19
This law provides that the maximum term of imprisonment shall be that which, in view of the attending
circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of the said code which is prisioncorreccional
minimumor6monthsand1dayto2yearsand4months.Andtheminimumshallbewithintherangeofthe
penaltynextlowertothatprescribedbytheCodefortheoffense.Thepenaltynextlowerwouldbeinthe
rangeofdestierromaximumor4years2monthsand1dayto6yearstoarrestomayormediumor2months
and1dayto4months.
WHEREFORE, the decision rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Tagbilaran and affirmed by the
respondent Court of Appeals is hereby MODIFIED in that the herein JORGE TAER is convicted as an
accessoryofthecrimeofcattlerustlingasdefinedandpenalizedbyPDNo.533amendingArts.308,309,
and310oftheRevisedPenalCodeandhewillservetheminimumpenaltywithintherangeofarrestomayor
medium, which we shall fix at 4 months imprisonment and the maximum penalty of prision correccional
minimumwhichweshallfixat2years.
Withcosts.
SOORDERED.
MelencioHerrera(Chairperson),Paras,PadillaandRegalado,JJ.,concur.

Footnotes
1Imperial,JorgeS.,J.,ponenteMelo,JoseAR.andHerrera,ManuelC.,JJ.,concurringThird
Division.
2Hon.FernandoS.Ruiz,presidingjudge.
3"ThePeopleofthePhilippines,Plaintiff,vs.EmilioNamocatcataliasMilio,MarioCago,Jorge
Taer,andCiriloSaludes,Accused,"Crim.CaseNo.3104,For:TheftofLargeCattle,Original
Record,80.
4OriginalRecord,236.
5Rollo,3.
6Id.,3,4.
7OriginalRecord,supra,note1at9.
8Peoplev.Namocatcat,etal.,RTC(Tagbilaran,Br.M,Crim.CaseNo.3104,July6,1984quoted
inPeoplev.Taer,CAG.R.No.01213,May26,1988.
9Antoniov.Sandiganbayan,G.R.57937,October21,1989.
10Orodiov.CourtofAppeals,G.R.57519,September13,1989.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_85204_1990.html

4/5

8/10/2016

G.R. No. 85204

11Peoplev.Tanchoco,76Phil.467.
12T.S.N.,December8,1983,11.
13T.S.N.,April28,1983,6.
14RULESOFCOURT,Section25,Rule130.Accord,BelvisIIIv.CourtofAppeals,Nos.
L3890709,November14,1988,167SCRA333.
15Peoplev.Bazar,No.L41829,June27,1988,162SCRA618.
16Pres.DecreeNo.533(1974)Peoplev.Macatanda,No.51368,November6,1981,109SCRA
40.
17Pres.DecreeNo.533provides:
c.Cattlerustlingisthetakingawaybyanymeans,methodsorscheme,withouttheconsentof
theowner/raiser,ofanyoftheabovementionedanimalswhetherornotforprofitorgain,or
whethercommittedwithorwithoutviolenceagainstorintimidationofanypersonorforceupon
things...
18REV.PEN.CODE,Art.64.
19ActNo.4103(1933)asamendedbyActNo.4225(1935),Section1.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/jun1990/gr_85204_1990.html

5/5