G.R. No. L-1289. June 10, 1971.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FERNANDO CORNELIO, ET AL., accused, RAFAEL BANGUEY AND MATIAS SIGNAOA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused Rafael Banguey and Matias Signaoa were convicted by the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur of Robbery with Homicide and Physical Injuries and sentenced to death on December 11, 1946. They appealed. However, on February 13, 1947, they escaped from the provincial jail in Vigan. Their original counsel failed to file a brief, and a counsel de oficio was appointed. This counsel successfully moved to suspend proceedings pending the appellants’ apprehension. Despite periodic inquiries by the Court to law enforcement agencies spanning over two decades, the appellants were never recaptured. The prosecution evidence established that around midnight of January 12, 1946, in Barrio Tablac, Candon, Ilocos Sur, a band of six armed men, including the appellants, entered the house of Narciso Galicia. They tied up Narciso, robbed his sisters Tranquilina and Paula Galicia of cash and valuables, shot and wounded Paula, and then took Narciso to an uninhabited place where he was shot and killed.

ISSUE

Whether the Supreme Court can and should review the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty despite the appellants’ escape and prolonged absence.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that the escape of the accused does not divest the Court of its jurisdiction nor relieve it of the mandatory duty to review the case. An automatic review of all death penalty cases is required by law, and this duty is not extinguished by a withdrawal of appeal or, as in this case, by the escape of the convicted individuals. The Court emphasized that it could not allow the case to remain indefinitely on its docket. Proceeding to review the evidence en consulta, the Court found the trial court’s factual findings and legal conclusions to be fully supported. The positive identification of the appellants by the eyewitness victims, Paula and Tranquilina Galicia, was deemed credible and untainted by ill motive. Their testimonies were consistent and detailed, aided by moonlight and a lamp. The defense of alibi presented by the appellants was weak and uncorroborated. Furthermore, their escape was considered indicative of a consciousness of guilt. The crime was correctly classified as the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. The trial court properly appreciated five aggravating circumstances: commission by a band, nighttime, dwelling, treachery, and the killing in an uninhabited place. With no mitigating circumstances to offset these, the imposition of the death penalty was affirmed. The Court modified the civil indemnity, increasing the award to the heirs of Narciso Galicia to P12,000.00.