People vs YJORGE Y RAMIZER - G.R. No. 99379 | Criminal Cases | Case Digest

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.EDUARDO JORGE Y RAMIREZ
G.R. No. 99379 April 22, 1994

Facts:

Patricio Ocenar, a barangay tanod of Barangay Doña Imelda, Quezon City. Ocenar narrates that on 26 June 1990, at around nine-thirty in the evening, he was at the barangay hall. Then a person informed him that Francisco Palma was being molested by three men. Taking with him his "knife-stick," Ocenar proceeded to Paui Street pointed to by the informer. There, at some ten arm’s length, Ocenar saw Eduardo Jorge and Romeo Lajera holding the hands of Palma and a woman stabbing him on the left chest with a long instrument. Ocenar could not tell exactly what kind of weapon was used. He shouted at them and all three ran away leaving Palma behind to chase his aggressors but he collapsed immediately on Baloy Street. According to

Dr. Renato Bautista who examined the victim, the stab wound on his left chest was the cause of his death. On the part of appellant Jorge, he denies any participation in the crime. He claims he was sleeping in his house at the time of the killing and was only awakened when policemen, led by the widow, forced him out of his house despite his protestations and profession of innocence, and brought to the police station.

Issue: 

Whether or not Eduardo Jorge is a Principal by Indispendable Cooperaton

Held: 

To be a principal by indispensable cooperation, one must participate in the criminal resolution, a conspiracy or unity in criminal purpose and cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act without which it would not have been accomplished. The only involvement of appellant was his holding of the hand of Palma when he was stabbed by Bernales on the left chest. There was no other evidence to show unity of design. It is possible that the appellant had no knowledge of the common design, if there was any, nor of the intended assault until the victim was stabbed. The thrust could have been made at the spur of the moment, totally unexpected by appellant. The mere holding of the victim's hand does not necessarily prove intention to kill. If the tragedy was a chance stabbing, there can be no conspiracy to speak of. Perhaps it would have been different if the victim was stabbed more than once and appellant still held on to the hand of the victim.