GR 89116; (August, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. No. 89116, August 22, 1990
The People of the Philippines vs. Calixto Tumale y Tanguin, Maximo Atienza y Ambal, Rolando Titoy y Bantas
FACTS
On September 5, 1987, five men robbed the store and residence of Lola Gorgonia Danque Vda. de Limcangco in Quezon City. The perpetrators tied up the victim, her helper Susan Aguilar, and driver Sammy Cardenas. They ransacked the premises, carting away cash and valuables. After the robbery, Lola Gorgonia was found in poor condition and later pronounced dead at a hospital due to cardiac failure secondary to the traumatic incident. The police investigation, aided by a sketch from eyewitness descriptions, led to the apprehension of Calixto Tumale. His extrajudicial statement, given without counsel, implicated Maximo Atienza, Rolando Titoy, and others. All three were charged with robbery with homicide.
ISSUE
The pivotal issue is whether the appellants were duly identified as among the perpetrators of the robbery that resulted in homicide.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Calixto Tumale and Maximo Atienza but acquitted Rolando Titoy. The Court held that positive identification is crucial to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Eyewitness Susan Aguilar positively identified Tumale in court, recognizing him as someone who frequented the store. She also identified Atienza as one of the men who tied her up. This direct testimony sufficiently established their participation. The Court found conspiracy from their joint and simultaneous acts in disabling the household and carting away property, demonstrating a unity of purpose to commit the robbery which resulted in the victim’s death.
However, the Court acquitted Rolando Titoy due to the prosecution’s failure to positively identify him. Susan Aguilar, who is Titoy’s mother, testified she could not say if her masked son was among the robbers. No other witness identified him. Regarding Tumale’s extrajudicial confession, the Court ruled it inadmissible as it was obtained without the assistance of counsel, violating constitutional rights. It could not be used against him or his co-accused. The conviction of Tumale and Atienza rested not on this confession but on the credible and positive eyewitness identification. Their guilt as principals in the complex crime of robbery with homicide was thus proven beyond reasonable doubt.