G.R. No. 129113 , September 17, 2002
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Mamerto Ranis, Jr. @ “Jun,” Carlito Arellano y Buscay, Bienvinido Murphy @ “Imbing,” Ernesto Sabiyon y Ellido, Cesario Murphy y Suella, Lolita Santos y Andrade, accused. Ernesto Sabiyon y Ellido, Cesario Murphy y Suella, and Lolita Santos y Andrade, accused-appellants.

FACTS

An amended information charged the appellants and others with Robbery with Homicide. The prosecution alleged that on March 10, 1994, in Pililia, Rizal, the accused, armed with scythes and a knife, conspired to rob Benedicto Hernandez of cash and jewelry worth P402,000. On the occasion of the robbery, they attacked and killed Hernandez. Appellants Sabiyon, Murphy, and Santos pleaded not guilty; co-accused Arellano died before arraignment, while Ranis and Bienvinido Murphy remained at large.
The prosecution presented eight witnesses. Marivic Rodelas, the victim’s live-in partner, testified that around 8:00 PM on March 10, 1994, while she, Hernandez, and their baby were in their bedroom, appellants Sabiyon and Murphy, whom she identified by their features (Sabiyon as cross-eyed and Murphy having an “alupihan-like” scar), entered armed. Murphy poked a knife at her neck while Sabiyon straddled Hernandez. They demanded money and jewelry, took P2,000 and items worth about P400,000, tied Rodelas and Hernandez with an electric cord, and took Hernandez away. After freeing herself, she sought help from family friend Noel Espinosa and reported to the police. Hernandez’s body, with multiple hack wounds and still tied, was found nearby; he was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. Rodelas later met their housemaid, appellant Santos, who appeared pale and nervous. Rodelas also testified about a prior disagreement between Hernandez and accused Mamerto Ranis over payment for cleaning a calamansian farm, where Ranis was accompanied by two workers resembling Sabiyon and Murphy.
Other prosecution witnesses corroborated details: Noel Espinosa heard screams and whispering; Maria Luisa Hernandez (legal wife) identified recovered watches and testified on funeral expenses; police officers (SPO1 Banago, SPO4 Anero, SPO1 Arriesgado) testified on the investigation, crime scene, and arrests; Dr. Rosalin POCEDON conducted the autopsy, finding 26 wounds caused by sharp and blunt instruments; and Atty. Rafael Mateo testified he assisted the appellants during custodial investigation, informing them of their rights, and that they confessed—Sabiyon admitted killing Hernandez and implicated Santos, while Santos, after initial denial, executed two affidavits confessing her participation.
The defense presented the three appellants and three other witnesses. Appellants Sabiyon and Murphy denied involvement, claiming they were arrested on March 17, 1994, tortured into confessing, and did not know Santos before jail. They alleged their extrajudicial confessions were coerced and given without proper assistance from Atty. Mateo. Witness Freddie Esminda, their employer, testified they worked until March 12, 1994, and were drinking at his house until 7:30 PM on March 10, but was uncertain if they worked that day. Appellant Santos denied any involvement, claiming her confessions were extracted through force and intimidation, and that she was merely a housemaid unaware of the crime.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of appellants Ernesto Sabiyon, Cesario Murphy, and Lolita Santos for the crime of Robbery with Homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court MODIFIED the Regional Trial Court’s decision.
1. Appellants Ernesto Sabiyon and Cesario Murphy are found GUILTY of robbery with homicide. The Court affirmed their conviction based on the positive identification by eyewitness Marivic Rodelas, who provided clear and consistent details of their physical features and actions during the robbery. Their defenses of alibi and denial were weak and could not prevail over positive identification. Their claims of torture to invalidate their extrajudicial confessions were unsupported by evidence, as they did not undergo medical examination or file charges. The Court found the confessions admissible, given with the assistance of counsel (Atty. Mateo) after being informed of their rights. The elements of robbery with homicide were established: taking of personal property with intent to gain, with violence or intimidation against persons, and homicide committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery. The penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, as the death penalty could not be imposed due to insufficient evidence of aggravating circumstances. They are ordered to return the stolen cash and items and pay jointly and severally P50,000 as civil indemnity and P18,500 as actual damages to the victim’s heirs.
2. Appellant Lolita Santos is ACQUITTED for lack of sufficient evidence. The Court found the evidence against her insufficient to prove conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Her alleged extrajudicial confessions were inconsistent and obtained under circumstances casting doubt on their voluntariness. The prosecution failed to corroborate her alleged participation with other evidence. She is ordered released unless held for another lawful cause.