GR 126126; (October, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 126126 ; October 30, 2000
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Sales Sabadao, Vidal Valdez, Carlos Mayo and Albert Abangon, accused. Sales Sabadao and Vidal Valdez, accused-appellants.
FACTS
Accused-appellants Sales Sabadao and Vidal Valdez, along with others, were charged with Robbery with Homicide and separate counts of Illegal Possession of Firearms under Presidential Decree No. 1866. The charges stemmed from the robbery of the Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) in Batac, Ilocos Norte, on June 23, 1987. During the robbery, the accused, armed with unlicensed firearms, divested the bank’s security guards of their service weapons and took bank money. When responding police officers arrived, a shootout ensued resulting in the deaths of Security Guard Romeo Aganon and Police Officer Arnulfo Valera. The trial court convicted Sabadao and Valdez of both charges and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua for robbery with homicide.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide and of Illegal Possession of Firearms.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Robbery with Homicide but acquitted the appellants for Illegal Possession of Firearms. On the first charge, the Court found the prosecution evidence sufficient to establish conspiracy. Witnesses, including the bank manager, positively identified Sabadao and Valdez as among the armed men who entered the bank, announced the hold-up, and participated in the violent takeover which directly resulted in the killings during its execution. The deaths of Aganon and Valera were a direct consequence of the robbery, satisfying the elements of the complex crime.
Regarding the firearms charges, the Court applied the amendatory law, Republic Act No. 8294 , which provides that if an unlicensed firearm is used in the commission of another crime, there shall be no separate offense for illegal possession. The law, being favorable to the accused, was given retroactive effect. Since the unlicensed firearms were used in the commission of Robbery with Homicide, the separate convictions for illegal possession under P.D. 1866 were set aside. The penalties for Robbery with Homicide were upheld, but the awards for damages were modified in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.