G.R. No. 111194 October 9, 1997
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Wilfredo G. Teodoro, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Two Informations were filed against Wilfredo G. Teodoro. In Criminal Case No. 91327, he was charged with robbery with homicide for allegedly conspiring with Vic Naguit (at large) to rob Eden M. Cabarubias of P25,000.00 and, on the occasion thereof, stabbing her to death on February 3, 1992. In Criminal Case No. 91328, he was charged with frustrated homicide for stabbing Margie M. Ganaban, the housemaid. The accused pleaded not guilty, and the cases were tried jointly.
The prosecution’s version, based on the trial court’s summary, stated that Teodoro and Naguit arrived at Cabarubias’s house. After being let in by Ganaban, Teodoro stabbed Ganaban, then proceeded to the garage where Cabarubias was pleading for mercy. Teodoro ransacked Cabarubias’s room. Ganaban, though wounded, survived and identified her attacker as “Willy.” Cabarubias died from multiple stab wounds. The defense’s version, as summarized in the Appellant’s Brief, claimed that Teodoro and Naguit went to Cabarubias’s house to claim P70,000.00 from a car transaction. A misunderstanding ensued between Cabarubias and Naguit, who then stabbed Cabarubias. Teodoro claimed he was shocked, lost consciousness, and was pulled away by Naguit, denying involvement in the stabbing or robbery. The trial court convicted Teodoro of robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua for the former, with damages.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the prosecution proved the crime of robbery with homicide beyond reasonable doubt, specifically whether the element of robbery was conclusively established alongside the killing.

RULING

The Supreme Court MODIFIED the trial court’s Decision. It held that a conviction for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide requires robbery to be proven as conclusively as the killing itself. The Court found the evidence for robbery insufficient. The only alleged evidence of taking was Ganaban’s testimony that she saw Teodoro ransack the room, but she did not actually see him take any money or property. No witness testified to seeing the accused take the P25,000.00, and the victim’s father, who reported the theft, did not testify. Without conclusive proof of robbery, the crime committed relative to Cabarubias’s death is homicide, not robbery with homicide. The Court affirmed the conviction for frustrated homicide against Ganaban, giving full credence to her positive identification of Teodoro as her assailant and rejecting the defense of denial. The penalty for homicide was modified to an indeterminate sentence of 10 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The penalty for frustrated homicide was modified to an indeterminate sentence of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor, as maximum. The civil indemnity of P50,000.00 to Cabarubias’s heirs was affirmed, but the awards of P20,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as reimbursement for stolen cash were deleted for lack of factual basis.