People vs. Roberto Jesalva, G.R. No.

227306 (June 19, 2017)

Facts:
In September 2007, Arnel Ortigosa, Renato Flores and Manny Boy Ditche were drinking
in Dupax Street, Old Balara, Quezon City when they decided to go to a store to buy
cigarettes. On their way to the store, Flores noticed defendant Roberto Jesalva standing in a
corner near the store and staring at them. Jesalva then walked away but he came back with
companions Ryan Menieva and Junie Ilaw. Menieva proceeded to stab Ortigosa twice with an
icepick. As Menieva stabbed Ortigosa, Ilaw pointed a sumpak at Ortigosa while the defendant
pointed at Ortigosa's group. After the stabbing, Ortigosa’s companions rushed him to East
Avenue Medical Center where he died.

A warrant of arrest was issued against Menieva, Ilaw and the defendant. However, only
the defendant was arrested. Upon arraignment, he pleaded not guilty to the charge of murder and
denied any participation in the victim’s stabbing.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a decision holding that the defendant conspired
with Menieva and Ilaw to kill Ortigosa. The RTC held that Flores positively identified the
defendant in open court as the person who stabbed the victim. When the case reached the Court
of Appeals (CA), it decreased the defendant’s participation, stating that Menieva was the one
who stabbed the victim while Jesalva only accompanied the perpetrators while pointing at the
group of Ortigosa.

Issue:
Whether or not the defendant conspired with Menieva and Ilaw in committing the crime
of murder.

Ruling:
No. The prosecution failed to prove that Jesalva conspired with the culprits.

As explained by the Supreme Court, conspiracy is said to exist where two or more
persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
The essence of conspiracy is the unity of action and purpose. Its elements, like the physical acts
constituting the crime itself, must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

In the current case, there is no strong motive on the part of Jesalva and his companions to
kill the deceased; thus, it cannot be said that they conspired to commit the crime. The
defendant's act of pointing to the victim and his group is not an overt act which shows that he
acted in concert with his co-accused to cause the death of Ortigosa. Mere knowledge,
acquiescence or approval of the act, without the cooperation and the agreement to cooperate, is
not enough to establish conspiracy. In the absence of conspiracy, the defendant is responsible
only for the consequences of his own acts. All that Jesalva did was to stare and point at the
victim and his companions. Nevertheless, these are not crimes.

Thus, Jesalva is ACQUITTED on reasonable doubt of the crime charged.