GR 95353 54; (March, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 95353-54 March 7, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PAUL SANDOVAL and PAULINO PAT, accused. PAULINO PAT, accused-appellant.
FACTS
In the early morning of May 31, 1986, in Cebu City, a group of young men, including Franklin Baguio, Romeo Laurente, and Amelito Undalok, were walking home. Undalok noticed two men, later identified as Paul Sandoval and Paulino Pat, following them. Sandoval and Pat overtook them, with Pat, armed with a knife, frisking Laurente and taking his wallet and wristwatch. Sandoval searched Baguio’s pockets. When Baguio resisted by covering his pocket, Sandoval stabbed him in the chest. Baguio died from the stab wounds. The accused were charged with the special complex crime of robbery with homicide and highway robbery under P.D. No. 532.
The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the eyewitness testimony of Amelito Undalok, who positively identified both accused. The defense interposed denial and alibi, presenting witnesses who suggested other suspects and claiming the accused were picked up by police on a later date. The trial court convicted both accused, sentencing Pat to reclusion perpetua for robbery with homicide and an indeterminate penalty for highway robbery.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Paulino Pat for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide and for highway robbery beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimony of eyewitness Amelito Undalok to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. He had a clear view of the incident under a mercury lamp and was able to describe the specific roles of each accused: Pat divested Laurente of his belongings, while Sandoval stabbed Baguio during the robbery. The defense of alibi and denial cannot prevail over this positive identification. For the crime of robbery with homicide, all who took part in the robbery are liable for the homicide, even if they did not directly inflict the fatal wound, provided the killing was committed by reason or on occasion of the robbery. Here, the stabbing occurred when Baguio resisted the robbery, making it a constitutive part of the same criminal act. Thus, Pat, as a conspirator in the robbery, is equally liable for the resulting homicide. The Court also upheld the conviction for highway robbery under P.D. No. 532, as the robbery of Laurente’s belongings occurred on a public highway. The penalties imposed by the trial court were affirmed.