GR 129893; (December, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 129893 December 10, 1999
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARNOLD DIZON y BULURAN @ “APENG”, accused-appellant.
FACTS
In the early morning of May 24, 1997, accused-appellant Arnold Dizon entered the Gesmundo family home in San Pablo City. He was discovered by Jovita Gesmundo, whom he immediately stabbed. Her sons, Erwin and Ruel, intervened and were also attacked. Her daughter, Gesalyn, awakened by the commotion, was likewise assaulted. After stabbing the family members, Dizon ransacked the house. Ruel, though wounded, survived by playing dead. He witnessed Dizon approach the prone Gesalyn and heard her plead “Tama na!” before falling silent. Ruel later saw his sister lying face down with her underwear pulled down. Dizon then left the scene.
Ruel managed to seek help and identified Dizon as the perpetrator. Dizon’s suspicious behavior at the crime scene and the hospital corroborated his guilt. An Amended Information charged Dizon with Robbery with Homicide (for the deaths of Jovita and Erwin during a robbery), Frustrated Homicide (for the attack on Ruel), and Rape with Homicide (for the death of Gesalyn). The trial court convicted him on all counts and imposed the death penalty for the special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide aggravated by Rape, Dwelling, and Nocturnity.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused-appellant of the crimes charged and properly appreciated the aggravating circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the legal characterization and penalties. The Court held that the killing of Jovita and Erwin was not proven to be by reason or on the occasion of the robbery. The evidence showed the intent to kill preceded the intent to rob, as the stabbings occurred before the ransacking. Therefore, the crimes against Jovita and Erwin constitute two separate counts of Homicide, not the special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide. The attack on Ruel was properly classified as Frustrated Homicide.
For the death of Gesalyn, the Court found the elements of Rape with Homicide were established. Ruel’s testimony that he saw Gesalyn’s underwear pulled down after the attack, coupled with her pleas, supported the conclusion of rape. The killing was committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, forming the special complex crime. The aggravating circumstances of dwelling and nocturnity were duly proven and appreciated. With no mitigating circumstances, the penalty for Rape with Homicide under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 , is death. The Court thus imposed the death penalty for Criminal Case No. 10407-SP (97) and corresponding penalties for the other offenses.