PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,-PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE VS. ALFREDO SORIO ALIAS “FRED”, CESAR SORIO AND VICTORIANO SORIO ALIAS “PIANONG”, DEFENDANTS. VICTORIANO SORIO ALIAS “PIANONG”,…

In Criminal Cases Nos. 21502 and 21503 of the Cqurt of First Instance of
Pangasinan, for the crime of murder upon the person of Amado Sanchez and
attempted murder upon that of Hilario Cruz, respectively, which were jointly
heard, by agreement of the parties, said court rendered a single decision
convicting Victoriano Sorio, alias Pianong, and his sons, Alfredo
Sorio, alias Fred, and Cesar Sorio, of murder in the first case, and
light threat, in the second case, and sentenced each one of them, in the former,
to life imprisonment, to jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of Amado
Sanchez, deceased, in the sum of P4,000.00, and to pay the costs, and, in the
latter, to ten (10) days of arresto menor and to pay the costs, said
penalties to be served consecutively. Victoriano Sorio has appealed from said
decision insofar only as the first case is concerned.

It appears that on October 26, 1956, Hilario Cruz, the offended party in Case
No. 21503, an employee in the office of the Highway District Engineer of
Pangasinan, housed in a structure known as garage or motor pool, near the
capitol building, in Lingayen, Pangasinan, reported to the Highway District
Engineer Marcelino Samson, that herein appellant, Victoriano Sorio, and one
Agustin Banloa, another employee in said office, had stolen therefrom a roll of
barbed wire and that, in the morning of December 3, 1956, said Hilario Cruz was
advised by his brother, Fructuoso Cruz, not to go to said capitol, because Mandy
which was the nickname of Amado Sanchez, had tipped him. (Fructuoso) that
appellant, his son Alfredo and others were looking for him (Hilario Cruz) and
Amado Sanchez, armed with weapons. In the language of the lower court, the
following took place subsequently that same morning:

“(a) that on the morning of December 3, 1956, at around 9:00 o’clock, the
three accused were seen at the garage compound near the capitol building at
Lingayen, Pangasinan, Fred Sorio and Cesar Sorio near the building where the
District Engineer lives, and in whose ground floor, Hilario Cruz was holding
office, Fred Sorio, around one meter from the window near which Hilario Cruz had
his desk, and a few meters away was Cesar Sorio, and around twelve meters away
was Victoriano Sorio, Fred Sorio and Cesar Sorio, having their weapons tucked
inside their pants; (b) that Fred Sorio approached Hilario Cruz and told him to
go out, but the latter in turn asked the former to go inside if he wanted
something; (c) that when Fred Sorio was one foot away from Hilario Cruz, he
unsheated his dagger and said, ‘Father, come’, and Victoriano Sorio said, and
‘Go ahead, get inside, if you do not go inside, I will be the one’, and then
Fred Sorio pushed the door, but Hilario Cruz was able to close it before and the
three accused were, later on, brought out from the garage compound by Perfecto
Rancudo thru the outer gate; (d) that once outside the garage compound and while
the three accused were going towards the west a Pantranco bus passed by and
stopped in front of the capitol building, and when the bus started to proceed,
the accused said. ‘Para, para’, for which the bus stopped, and they placed
themselves near the bus, Fred Sorio, at the left side, Cesar Sorio, at right,
and Victoriano Sorio behind the bus, all of them unsheating their ‘balisong’
when they were nearing the Pantranco bus and while thus deployed, Alfredo Sorio
asked Amado Sanchez to come down saying: ‘Mandy, come down: (e) that immediately
after alighting from the bus, Amado Sanchez ran towards the stairs of the
capitol building, but after reaching the first ladder, he was overtaken by Cesar
Sorio who, almost behind his- victim, stabbed him at the left side, below the
breast, thereupon, the poor victim turned back and tried to run down the ladder,
but he was blocked by Alfredo Sorio who gave him several stab blow’s; (f) that
in spite of the mortal blows he had already received, Sanchez continued to run,
but was pursued but had to fall near a bamboo arch in front of the capitol
building, and while lying prostrate, Cesar Sorio gave him further blows, and
left, not before telling his brother, Alfredo Sorio; ‘That is enough brother, he
is already dead, and, later on, going to where his father Victoriano,
alias Pianong was; and that Alfredo, alias Fred Sorio going to where
Sanchez was said: ‘So, you are still alive’, and then stabbed the deceased
several times; (g) that while the three accused were hurrying towards the
Pantranco bus, Victoriano Sorio made sign with his hand urging Fred Sorio to go
ahead and while his two sons were chasing Sanchez, he urged them saying: ‘Sigue,
sigue’ (Go ahead, go ahead); and (h) that the late Amado Sanchez was taken to
the Pangasinan Provincial Hospital still alive, but died upon reaching the
hospital.”

Upon the other hand, the defense tried to prove that what happened was
this:

“In the morning of December 3, 1956, upon previous understanding the other
two accused Alfredo Sorio and Cesar Sorio met in the Office of the Cashier
(District Engineer) in the Capitol building in Lingayen. Province of Pangasinan.
After collecting his pay Cesar loaned his brother Fred some money and afterwards
went to a sari-sari store at the back of the Capitol building to pay his bills
while Fred went to the opposite direction. While in the store he saw persons
rushing towards the front of the building to witness a fight that was going on.
He also followed and when he reached the front door he saw his brother Fred
locked up in deadly combat with the deceased Amado Sanchez. Seeing this, he ran
towards the East where the garage is located to inform his father Victoriano
Sorio of what he saw, The encounter which lasted approximately ten to fifteen
minutes proved fatal for Amado Sanchez after receiving various mortal wounds
from Fred Sorio. When appellant Victoriano Sorio and his son Cesar, arrived in
front of the Capitol building, the fight was all over whereupon herein appellant
advised his other son Fred Sorio to surrender and go peacefully with a police
officer to the Municipal building. He was accompanied by Cesar Sorio. Several
persons placed the body of Amado Sanchez in a car owned by a provincial board
member and took it to the provincial hospital at Dagupan where he was pronounced
dead on arrival.” (Pp. 3-4, Appellant’s Brief.)

Inasmuch as this version of the defense is inconsistent With that of the
prosecution, the case hinges mainly on the relative credibility of the testimony
of the opposing witnesses, which was decided by the lower court in favor of the
prosecution and against the defense. The record before us fully justifies the
action thus taken by His Honor, the trial Judge. Indeed, the theory of the
prosecution is bolstered up by the fact that neither Alfredo Sorio nor Cesar’
Sorio has appealed from the decision of the lower court, although both, or, at
least, Cesar Sorio would have been absolutely innocent, if their version of the
occurrence were true.

Appellant maintains, however, that he should be acquitted of the charge of
murder for he had not laid hands upon the person of Amado Sanchez and the
latter’s death was due to injuries inflicted, not by him (appellant) ; but by
his sons, Alfredo and Cesar. It is mainly urged by appellant that the existence
of conspiracy between him and his aforementioned children has not been
sufficiently established.

In this connection the prosecution placed on the witness stand Hilario Cruz,
who was corroborated by his brother Fructuoso Cruz, his (Hilario’s) officemate
Dante Fernandez, Highway District Engineer Marcelino Sam-eon, security guard
Perfecto Rancudo and Corleto Angeles, a janitor in the Provincial Capitol of
Pangasinan. The prosecution introduced also, the testimony of Gervacio de la
Cruz, one of the passengers of the Pantranco bus above mentioned, Feliciano
Najera, municipal treasurer of Alaminos, Pangasinan (who was in the capitol at
the time of the occurrence), Manuel Villa (who was supervising the work of a
detail of prisoners, in front of the capitol, about 30 meters therefrom, near a
bamboo arch, a few paces from which Amado Sanchez fell down mortally wounded),
Jaime San Juan (one of the convicts forming part of said detail), and
Hermenegildo Santos, a government employee who happened to be at the threshold
of the capitol when the crime charged was committed, apart from the testimony of
the physician (Dr. Braulio de Venecia) who made an autopsy of the body of Amado
Sanchez and the report on the result thereof. It is, likewise, worthy of notice
that the defense has not even tried to impugn the motives of these witnesses in
testifying as they did, and that appellant did not take the witness stand to
deny any of the incriminatory acts imputed to him by said witnesses for the
prosecution. More specifically, the following facts, which are relevant to
appellant’s participation in the commission of the offense charged, have been
established, to wit:

1. On October 26, 1956, Hilario Cruz reported to the Highway District Engineer
   Marcelino Samson, that a roll of barbed wire had been stolen from his office by
   appellant Victoriano Sorio and Agustin Banloa. When Samson investigated Banloa
   about it, the latter admitted his guilt, but claimed to have acted, not only
   with the assistance of, but, also, under pressure from Victoriano Sorio whom
   Banloa characterized as a “tough guy”.
2. Appellant was the person directly affected by said report. It was he,
   primarily, who had a motive, therefore, to harbor ill feeling towards Hilario
   Cruz, and, incidentally, Amado Sanchez, who gave Fructuoso Cruz a timely warning
   of the danger to the safety of his brother Hilario Cruz, resulting from his
   aforementioned report.
3. In the morning of Beeember 3, 1956, appellant accompanied his children
   Alfredo and Cesar to the garage or motor pool where’Hilario Cruz was
   working.
4. Appellant and his children were each armed with deadly weapons.
5. Upon arrival at said place, they proceeded to the .structure housing the
   office of Hilario Cruz and, approaching the window near which he was
   working—like Dante Fernandez, another employee, in the same office—Alfredo Sorio
   invited him (Hilario) to converse outside and then ;Winkecbat appellant, wlio
   winked at Alfredo.
6. The invitation having been rejected by Hilario Cruz, ¦Alfredo drew out his
   dagger, and appellant coaxed him to “Go ahead,” and “get inside”, adding that,
   if he (Alfredo) did not do so, he (appellant) would.
7. As Hilario Cruz locked the door of his office, Victoriano and Alfredo tried
   to force it open, for which reason Perfecto Banoudo, the security guard on duty
   in the compound, ordered the Sorios out of it.
8. Upon leaving the place, they noticed Amado Sanchez aboard a Pantranco bus
   that passed by, whereupon appellant and his sons ran towards the vehicle and
   bade it to stop.
9. With daggers unsheathed, Alfredo and Cesar Sorio placed themselves on each
   side of the bus, whereas Victoriano Sorio took his post behind it. Then Alfredo
   told Sanchez to alight therefrom.
10. When Sanchez jumped from it and ran away pursued by Alfredo and Cesar Sorio,
    appellant cajoled his children, shouting “sigue, sigue”.
11. After his sons had overtaken and stabbed Sanchez ten (10) times, appellant
    fled to San Carlos, Pangasinan, where he was arrested.

These facts show beyond doubt that Alfredo and Cesar Sorio acted in concert
with their father, appellant herein, and that there was, therefore, a unity of
purpose and action among them, which is the essence of conspiracy. In fact,
appellant—not his children—was the main source of motivation for the offense,
which was qualified by. treachery, and, hence, constitutes murder Although there
are indications of some premeditation, we are not inclined to disturb the action
of the lower court which seemingly gave the accused the benefit of doubt in
connection with said aggravating circumstance and, accordingly imposed the
medium penalty for murder.

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against
appellant Victoriano Sorio. It is so ordered.

Paras, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera,
Gutierrez David, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.