GR L 18866; (January, 1966) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-18866; January 31, 1966
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DIOSDADO DEVELOS alias MARIANO and SANTIAGO ALDEA, JR. alias JUANITO, defendants. DIOSDADO DEVELOS alias MARIANO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
On June 19, 1961, the body of Marcelino Tan Bon Huat was discovered in his unopened store in Iloilo City. An autopsy revealed he died from asphyxia due to strangulation and burns, with additional wounds. Investigation identified the perpetrators as his houseboys, Diosdado Develos (appellant, 22 years old) and Santiago Aldea, Jr. (15 years old). Develos was arrested, and stolen items belonging to the victim were recovered from him. Both accused confessed and reenacted the crime. They were charged with robbery with homicide. During arraignment, both initially pleaded not guilty with counsel de oficio but later changed their pleas to guilty. The trial proceeded only to receive evidence on aggravating circumstances. The trial court found the crime attended by several aggravating circumstances and sentenced Develos to death. Aldea, being a minor under 16, received a suspended sentence under Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code and was committed to a training school. Develos appealed, questioning the penalty.
ISSUE
Whether the penalty of death imposed on appellant Diosdado Develos for the crime of robbery with homicide is correct, considering the attendant circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the penalty. It affirmed the presence of the aggravating circumstances of abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness, treachery, abuse of superior strength, and unusual cruelty, as proven by the evidence, including the confessions and reenactment. However, it found that the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court noted the appellant’s youth. Since the penalty for robbery with homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion perpetua to death, and for lack of the necessary votes to impose death, the Court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua. It also ordered the return of the recovered stolen articles to the victim’s heirs. The different treatment for co-accused Aldea was upheld as legally correct under Article 80 due to his minority.