GR L 37937; (September, 1986) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-37937 September 30, 1986
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAURO VALLENTE, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Mauro Vallente, along with several others, was charged with Robbery with Homicide. The information alleged that on April 7, 1973, in Manila, the accused, conspiring and confederating, and with four armed with guns and a knife, staged a holdup inside a passenger jeepney. By means of force and intimidation, they robbed passenger Natividad Pacheco of P830.00. On the occasion of the robbery, they attacked and shot her companion, Vito Robles, causing his death. After trial, the Circuit Criminal Court convicted Vallente and three co-accused as principals. Vallente was sentenced to death, a penalty subject to automatic review. Notably, Vallente escaped custody during the appeal, and two other convicted co-accused died. The case proceeded against Vallente as review of a death sentence is mandatory.
ISSUE
The primary issues are whether the trial court erred in: (1) finding the crime was consummated robbery with homicide; (2) finding Vallente participated as a principal; (3) appreciating the aggravating circumstances of craft and superior strength; and (4) imposing the death penalty while a co-accused received life imprisonment and others were acquitted.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Vallente’s conviction but modified the penalty. The crime committed was the special complex crime of consummated robbery with homicide, not merely attempted robbery. The facts established that the robbery was completed by taking P830.00 from Pacheco, and the killing of Robles occurred on the occasion thereof. Vallente’s active participation as a principal, through conspiracy, was proven. The aggravating circumstances of craft and taking advantage of superior strength were properly appreciated. Craft was evident in the accused pretending to be passengers to facilitate the holdup. Superior strength was present due to their number, concerted action, and use of firearms against an unarmed victim.
Regarding the penalty, the Court found the imposition of the death penalty on Vallente, while co-accused Carlos Medina received life imprisonment, did not constitute an error. Medina’s sentence became final as he did not appeal. The acquittal of other co-accused does not affect Vallente’s criminal liability. However, for lack of the necessary votes to impose the death penalty, the Court reduced Vallente’s sentence to reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnity to the heirs of Vito Robles was increased from P12,000.00 to P30,000.00. The decision was affirmed with these modifications.