People vs Oliva 2001 Quisumbing, J. Facts: May 26, 1986: Jacinto Magbojos, Jr.

. went out of their house early morning to count the coconuts in his dads coconut land uphill. At around 8 a.m., Cinco & Ibaya went to Magbojos house, however, they left after learning that he was not home. A few minutes after Magbojos got home, 4 persons entered their house, hogtied him and took him away walking towards the western direction Arturo Inopia, a farmer, testified that Ka Ambot (Oliva) & company visited him at about 8:30 or 9 a.m. They informed him that they were out to get Magbojos. Before leaving his house, Oliva warned him not to report to the police authorities otherwise Inopia will be killed Edgardo Labajata, a farmer, testified that he saw Magbojos (then hogtied) in the company of 5 persons. Magbojos appeared weak & w/abrasions on both sides of his face & can hardly talk. Oliva questioned Labajata & when the former learned that the latter knew Magbojos, he was also hogtied but was subsequently released on the condition that he will leave their barangay Magbojos brother, Renato, a policeman was informed by one Levelito Tuberion that he knew where Magbojos was buried since he was the one asked by Olivas group to accompany them to the burial site. Graveyard was dug & they found human bones, a shirt, short pants, coralon rope, a brief & black rubber band. Magbojos wife testified that these were personal belongings of her husband. Original charge: murder amended to kidnapping w/murder against Oliva, Salcedo & Cinco. All of them pleaded not guilty. Olivas defense: He was an NPA commanding officer in the Masbate area. Thus, he should be charged w/rebellion. Tuberion is in the list of shoot-to-kill order while Inopia was member of a group called Walang Patawad, pretending to be an NPA member for business extortion. Salcedos defense: At the date of the incident, he was staying w/his cousin in another barangay w/c was about 5 km away from Magbojos brgy or it would take approximately 5 hours to get there by walking Lower Court: Oliva & Salcedo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and not kidnapping w/murder. Cinco acquitted. Issue: WON Oliva should be charged w/rebellion. Ratio: Contentions of the Defense

Claim lacks factual & legal basis No rebellion in this case since the killing was not committed in furtherance of rebellion but for personal reasons/other motives. Thus, killing must punished separately even if committed simultaneously w/the rebellious acts there being no proof that the killing was in connection w/or in furtherance of the rebellious acts. It was not indubitably proven that Oliva was indeed a member of the NPA. Circumstantial evidence proves that Ka Ambot & Oliva are one & the same and that he took part in the commission of the crime Alibi cant stand since it was not impossible for them to be at the scene of the crime and they were positively identified by witnesses No treachery, evident premeditation & use of superior strength since theres no proof at all on how the killing was done Absence of further proof, the crime of attempt under Arts 249and 250 of the Penal Code.

HELD: RTC decision modified. Oliva & Salcedo guilty of homicide.