GR 127789; (April, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 127789. April 2, 2002.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DONATO CRUZ y MALEJANA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On September 12, 1996, Renato Robles arrived home to find his house locked and dark. After gaining entry with help, he discovered the bodies of his wife, Laura, and their 5-year-old daughter, Lara. Both victims had sustained multiple fatal stab wounds, with Laura suffering 43 wounds. The family’s cabinet had been ransacked, with a camera, cash, and other valuables missing. Appellant Donato Cruz was arrested and, assisted by counsel, executed a sworn confession. He admitted that while under the influence of drugs, he entered the Robles residence, panicked when Laura saw him, and stabbed her repeatedly. When Lara witnessed the attack, he followed and killed her as well. He then took the items. He was charged with two counts of murder and one count of theft.
ISSUE
The primary issues were: (1) the proper characterization and penalty for the killings, specifically whether the killing of the child constituted murder qualified by treachery; and (2) whether the crimes should have been prosecuted as the special complex crime of robbery with homicide instead of separate counts of murder and theft.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed appellant’s conviction but modified the penalties. For the killing of 5-year-old Lara, the Court ruled it was murder qualified by treachery. The established doctrine is that the killing of a minor child by an adult is inherently treacherous, as the child’s defenselessness ensures the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength was correctly deemed absorbed by treachery. With no other modifying circumstances, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua, not death. For the killing of Laura, the Court sustained the trial court’s finding of homicide, not murder, as treachery was not sufficiently proven. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty was set at 10 years of prision mayor as minimum to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
The Court also held that the prosecution correctly charged separate crimes of murder/homicide and theft, not robbery with homicide. The special complex crime requires that the main purpose be robbery, with homicide incidental. The evidence, including appellant’s confession, showed the primary intent was to kill after he panicked; the theft was merely an afterthought. The penalty for theft and the order for restitution were upheld. The award of moral damages was reduced to P100,000.00.