PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, EX-MAYOR CARLOS ESTONILO, SR., MAYOR REINARIO "REY"

vs.

EX-MAYOR CARLOS ESTONILO, SR., MAYOR REINARIO "REY" ESTONILO, EDE LB RANDO ESTONILO a.k.a. "EDEL
ESTONILO," EUTIQUIANO ITCOBANES a.k.a. "NONONG ITCOBANES," and CALVIN DELA CRUZ a.k.a. "BULLDOG
DELA CRUZ," Accused-Appellants.

G.R. No. 201565; October 13, 2014; LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:

FACTS

On April 4, 2005, the day before his father, Floro Casas (Floro), was gunned down, Felix was with the latter and
some teachers at the Celera Inocencio Elementary School, Placer, Masbate. They were working on the closing
ceremonies to be held the following day when one Ranio Morales called on Floro and told him that Mayor Carlos,
Sr. wanted to see him at his (Ranio) house. Floro and Felix went to see Mayor Carlos, Sr.. When they saw Mayor
Carlos, Sr., he showed them a program of a celebration of the Federation of 7th Day Adventist that contained the
names of the governor, the congressman, and Placer mayoralty candidate Vicente Cotero (Cotero), as guests of the
said activity. Felix asked his father why Cotero’s picture was so big while Mayor Carlos, Sr.’s name was not
mentioned in the program. Floro replied that he cannot help it because Cotero paid for the program. His answer
angered Mayor Carlos, Sr. and he scolded Floro and said "you are now for Cotero but you’re only Estonilo when
you ask for my signature to sign the voucher. This is up to now that you will be the supervisor of Celera" Floro
responded "when are you a superintendent when you don’t have any scholastic standing. Just look if I will still vote
for your son". Mayor Carlos, Sr. replied "let’s see if you can still vote"; and that the following day, Floro was shot to
death.

But prior to the April 4, 2005 incident, Felix recounted that he had a drinking spree with Nonoy and his friends
where they talked about the death of Titing Villester. He said that Nonoy told him not to be afraid because others
are afraid of them. They became afraid because they believe that Nonoy’s group killed Titing. Afterwards, they
were fetched by a van and was brought to the house of one Bobong Baldecir, nephew of Mayor Carlos Sr.. There
he was told that it is very important for his father to be on their side because his position has a big role in the
upcoming election. Felix said that he went along with him since he was in Daraga, the bailiwick of the Estonilos.14

Prosecution witness Serapion testified that while he was printing the name of Municipal Councilor candidate Boy
dela Pisa on the street facing the Celera Elementary School on the night of April 5, 2004, he heard gunshots coming
from inside the compound of the school. After two or three minutes, he saw more or less six persons coming out of
the school. He was able to identify three of them as present in the courtroom: Edel, Nonoy, and Nonong. He also
saw the six men approach Mayor Carlos, Sr.’s vehicle, which was parked near the school. Furthermore, he said that
Mayor Carlos, Sr. and Rey came out of a house nearby and upon reaching the vehicle, Serapion heard Nonoy say to
Mayor Carlos, Sr. "mission accomplished, sir". Thereafter, Mayor Carlos, Sr. ordered Nonoy and his group to
escape, which they did using two motorbikes towards the direction of Cataingan and Mayor Carlos, Sr. and Rey
drove towards the direction of Daraga.

Antipolo testified that on April 5, 2004, he was riding his motorcycle and passing by the gate of the Celera
Elementary School when he heard gunshots and someone shouted that Floro was shot.He stopped, alighted from
his motorcycle, went to the gate, and saw four persons holding short firearms. He identified Nonoy and Negro as
the two who fired at Floro about seven times and also identified Edel and Nonong as the two other gun holders. At
that moment, Gali shouted "sir, that’s enough, escape!"; that Gali was accompanied by someone named Ace,
Titing and Bulldog. Right after Gali shouted for them to escape, all of them hurriedly left the school compound. He
said that he saw Mayor Carlos, Sr.’s pick-up vehicle arrive soon thereafter; that Mayor Carlos, Sr., Rey and Negro
alighted from the vehicle and watched the proceedings; that he heard Mayor Carlos, Sr. say "leave it because it’s
already dead"; and that afterwards, the police officers arrived.

CRIM CHARGED: Murder with Direct Assault

RTC: guilty of the crime charged

CA: Affirmed the decision of RTC

ISSUE: Whether or not the accused-appellants were guilty of the crime charged

RULING: The Court ruled in Affirmative

To successfully prosecute the crime of murder, the following elements must be established: 53 (1) that a person was
killed; (2) that the accused killed him or her; (3) that the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances
mentioned in Article 248of the Revised Penal Code; and (4) that the killing is not parricide or infanticide.

In this case, the prosecution was able to clearly establish that (1) Floro was killed; (2) Ex-Mayor Carlos, Sr., Rey,
Edel, Nonong, and Calvin were five of the nine perpetrators who killed him; (3) the killing was attended by the
qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation as testified to by prosecution eyewitnesses, Servando and
Antipolo, as well as treachery as below discussed; and (4) the killing of Floro was neither parricide nor infanticide.

Of the four elements, the second and third elements are essentially contested by the defense. The Court finds that
the prosecution unquestionably established these two elements.

For the second element, the prosecution presented pieces of evidence which when joined together point to the
accused-appellants as the offenders. Foremost, there is motive to kill Floro. Essentially, the prosecution evidence
consists of both direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. The testimony of the eyewitness Antipolo is direct
evidence of the commission of the crime.

As for the third element of qualifying circumstance, the prosecution witness, Servando, testified that he was
present on the two occasions when the accused-appellants were planning tokill Floro. His categorical and straight
forward narration proves the existence of evident premeditation.

Treachery also attended the killing of Floro. In this case, accused-appellant Nonoy and accused Negro successively
fired at Floro about seven times – and the victim sustained 13 gunshot wounds all found to have been inflicted at
close range giving the latter no chance at all to evade the attack and defend himself from the unexpected
onslaught. Accused-appellants Edel and Nonong were on standby also holding their firearms to insure the success
of their "mission" without risk to themselves; and three others served as lookouts. Hence, there is no denying that
their collective acts point to a clear case of treachery.

On the offense committed by accused-appellants, the RTC correctly concluded that they should be held
accountable for the complex crime of direct assault with murder. There are two modes of committing atentados
contra la autoridad o sus agentes under Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code. Accused-appellants committed the
second form of assault, the elements of which are 1) that there must be an attack, use of force, or serious
intimidation or resistance upon a person in authority or his agent; 2) the assault was made when the said person
was performing his duties or on the occasion of such performance; and 3) the accused knew that the victim is a
person in authority or his agent, that is, that the accused must have the intention to offend, injure or assault the
offended party as a person in authority or an agent of a person in authority.

In this case, Floro was the duly appointed District Supervisor of Public Schools, Placer, Masbate, thus, was a person
in authority. But contrary to the statement of the RTC that there was direct assault just because Floro was a person
in authority, this Court clarifies that the finding of direct assault is based on the fact that the attack or assault on
Floro was, in reality, made by reason of the performance of his duty as the District Supervisor.

When the assault results in the killing of that agent or of a person in authority for that matter, there arises the
complex crime of direct assault with murder or homicide.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court of Appeals Decision dated May 12, 2011 in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No.
04142, affirming the Decision dated March 30, 2009, promulgated by the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 45,
in Criminal Case No. 05-238607, finding accused appellants REINARIO "REY" ESTONILO, EDELBRANDO "EDEL"
ESTONILO, EUTIQUIANO "NONONG" ITCOBANES, and CAL VIN "BULLDOG" DELA CRUZ GUILTY beyond reasonable
doubt of Murder with Direct Assault, is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS, the award of civil indemnity and
moral damages is increased to ₱100,000.00 each, in addition to ₱100,000.00 as exemplary damages, and the
imposition of 6% thereon as legal interest upon finality of this Court's Decision.

SO ORDERED.