G.R. No. 131036; June 20, 2001
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Donato del Rosario, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On September 26, 1992, Emelita Paragua left her house in Olongapo City, leaving her 11-year-old niece, Raquel Lopez, behind. Upon being notified their house was on fire, Paragua returned to find the sala burned and her niece dead in the kitchen, with her head covered by a raincoat and her neck and arms tied with CATV wire. Paragua also discovered several pieces of her jewelry were missing. The police investigation initially focused on a certain Ramon Ilagan, but he was released due to lack of evidence. Information later pointed to Donato del Rosario, who was seen near the house before the incident and had since disappeared. On October 2, 1992, del Rosario surrendered to the Subic police. He voluntarily accompanied police to recover the stolen jewelry, leading them to a pawnshop in Olongapo and a shop in Iba, Zambales, where the items were retrieved and later identified by Paragua. Del Rosario was then subjected to custodial investigation with the assistance of counsel, Atty. Norberto dela Cruz, and executed a waiver/confession. The medico-legal report stated the cause of Raquel Lopez’s death was asphyxia by strangulation and multiple physical injuries. At trial, del Rosario presented an alibi, claiming he was in Subic at the time of the crime and that his confession was extracted through force and intimidation. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of robbery with homicide and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the guilt of the accused, Donato del Rosario, for the crime of robbery with homicide has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction of appellant Donato del Rosario for the crime of robbery with homicide. The Court found that the prosecution successfully proved all the elements of the crime: (1) the taking of personal property with intent to gain, (2) the taking was accomplished with violence or intimidation against a person, and (3) on the occasion of the robbery, homicide was committed. The Court held that the extrajudicial confession, corroborated by the recovery of the stolen jewelry through the appellant’s own directions and the positive identification by the pawnshop personnel and the jewelry buyer, was admissible and credible. The defense of alibi was rejected for being weak and uncorroborated, and the claim of maltreatment to extract the confession was not substantiated. The Court modified the award of civil indemnity, reducing it from P100,000.00 to P50,000.00 in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.