GR L 4217; (January, 1952) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-4217; January 31, 1952
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LEONARDO EGIDO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The defendant, Leonardo Egido, was charged in the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental with the crime of robbery. The information alleged that on or about October 20, 1949, he entered the house of Jose Egido through a window, an opening not intended for entrance or egress, taking advantage of the darkness of the night. With intent of gain and through violence and intimidation against Jose Egido and his wife, he took cash amounting to P894 and a revolver valued at P190. The information specifically alleged the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity. The defendant pleaded guilty to the charge. The trial court convicted him, appreciating the mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty and the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity, and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty. The defendant appealed, contending the trial court erred in appreciating nocturnity as aggravating and in fixing the penalty.
ISSUE
1. Whether the trial court erred in appreciating nighttime as an aggravating circumstance.
2. Whether the trial court erred in fixing the penalty.
RULING
1. No. The trial court did not err in appreciating nighttime as an aggravating circumstance. By pleading guilty, the appellant admitted all the material facts alleged in the information, which specifically alleged that he took advantage of the darkness of the night and that the crime was aggravated by said circumstance.
2. Yes. The trial court erred in imposing the penalty. The information alleged the use of violence and intimidation without specifications sufficient to classify the robbery under paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. Therefore, the crime falls under paragraph 5 (“in other cases”) of said article, which prescribes the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period. With one mitigating circumstance (plea of guilty) and one aggravating circumstance (nocturnity) offsetting each other, the penalty should be imposed in its medium period. The Supreme Court modified the penalty to an indeterminate sentence of from 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional to 8 years of prision mayor, and affirmed the judgment in all other respects.