PEOPLE v. DASIG April 28, 1993 | Nocon, J. | Appeal from RTC Decision | Rebellion 4. Dasig contended, among others, that assuming arguendo he conspired in the killing, he should have been convicted at most of simple rebellion, not murder with direct assault. SUMMARY: Appellant and several others who were part of a sparrow unit killed a police officer performing traffic duties. Appellant was convicted of murder with direct assault. He appealed that it was merely rebellion. Court ruled in his favor. ISSUE: WoN the proper crime charged is rebellion, not murder with direct assault - YES DOCTRINE: Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion through crimes in themselves are deemed absorbed in one single crime of rebellion. FACTS: 1. Pfc. Redempto Manatad and two other police officers, Pfc. Ninah Tizon and Pfc. Rene Catamora, were tasked to man traffic. Pfc. Catamora noticed eight persons, including Edwin Nuñez, acting suspiciously, one of whomgave instructions to two of the men to approach Pfc. Manatad. 2. Pfc. Catamora followed the, but they sensed it and proceeded to the middle of the road and engaged him in a gunfight. He then heard a series of shots from the other group and saw Pfc. Manatad on the ground. Pfc. Catamora sought refuge at the BIR Office, from where he saw two persons take Pfc. Manatad’s gun and again fired on him to assure he was dead before the group fled. 3. Nuñez and appellant Rodrigo Dasig were located in a safehouse, where they were apprehended and disarmed. In the process, Dasig was shot in the arm. He confessed that he and Nuñez’s group had killed Pfc. Manatad, and that he and Nuñez, alias ‘Armand’ and ‘Mabi’ respectively, were members of a sparrow unit. He was found guilty of murder with direct assault. Nuñez died while the trial was still ongoing. RULING: Accused found guilty of participating in an act of rebellion beyond reasonable doubt. Penalty of 8 years prision mayor, and to pay deceased’s heirs P50,000 as civil indemnity. RATIO: 1. Art 135, RPC: Rebellion is committed by taking up arms against the government, among other means. Appellant voluntarily confessed his membership in the sparrow unit and his participation and that of the group in Pfc.Manatad’s killing. It is of judicial notice that the sparrow unit is the NPA’s liquidation squad, with the objective of overthrowing the government. 2. Rebellion consists of many acts. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion through crimes in themselves are deemed absorbed in one single crime of rebellion. The act of killing a police officer, knowing that the victim is a person in authority, is a mere component or ingredient of rebellion, or an act done in its furtherance. It cannot be the basis of a separate charge. 3. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is not applicable to persons convicted of rebellion. The Art 135 penalty for any person who promotes, maintains or heads a rebellion is prision mayor and a fine not exceeding P200,000. But since there is no evidence that appellant headed the crime committed, and in fact Pfc. Catamora pinpointed him as not the person giving instructions to the group that attacked Pfc. Manatad, the imposed penalty is eight years of prision mayor and civil indemnity of P50,000 to Manatad’s heirs.
