GR 145731; (June, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 145731; June 26, 2003
People of the Philippines, Appellee, vs. GREGORIO GERAL y FERNANDEZ AND MARCOS USNAN y BUSTAMANTE, Appellants.
FACTS
The case involves the robbery of the house of Mary Ann Estoce and the killing of her grandmother, Josefina Estoce, on August 18, 1996. Mary Ann testified that three men entered their home under a pretext, robbed them, and killed Josefina. She positively identified appellant Gregorio Geral as one of the perpetrators. Another witness, Edgar Sab-owan, testified that appellant Marcos Usnan had earlier confided plans to rob a house matching the victims’ and that on the night of the crime, Geral and another accomplice arrived at his house muddy and indicated the “job” was done and the old woman was dead. Geral denied involvement, claiming he was forced by three other individuals to accompany them to the scene and fled after witnessing the stabbing. Usnan presented an alibi, denying any participation or knowing his co-accused prior to detention.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the guilt of appellants Gregorio Geral and Marcos Usnan for the crime of Robbery with Homicide was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Geral’s conviction but acquitted Usnan. For Geral, the Court upheld the trial court’s reliance on the positive and categorical identification by eyewitness Mary Ann Estoce, which prevailed over his denial and unsubstantiated claim of being forced to the crime scene. His defense was deemed weak and unconvincing. The Court found the elements of Robbery with Homicide present: the taking of personal property with violence against persons, and a homicide committed by reason or on occasion of the robbery. The penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua, as the imposition of “reclusion perpetua to death” was improper, and the death penalty could not be applied absent requisite votes for affirmance.
For Usnan, the Court reversed his conviction. The evidence against him consisted solely of the testimony of Edgar Sab-owan, which the Court found insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Sab-owan’s testimony pertained only to alleged prior plans and post-crime statements by others, not to Usnan’s actual presence or participation during the commission of the crime itself. There was no evidence he was at the scene. The Court emphasized that conspiracy must be proven as clearly as the crime itself, and the evidence failed to convincingly link Usnan to the criminal conspiracy. Acquittal was thus mandated. The Court modified the awards for damages accordingly.