G.R. No. 165896, September 19, 2008
Rustico Abay, Jr. and Reynaldo Darilag vs. People of the Philippines

FACTS

Petitioners Rustico Abay, Jr. and Reynaldo Darilag, along with several others, were charged with Highway Robbery/Brigandage. The Information alleged that on February 17, 1994, the accused, armed and forming a band, boarded a Kapalaran bus on the South Luzon Expressway in Biñan, Laguna. They divested passengers of cash and valuables, and during the incident, shot a passenger, Rogelio Ronillo. The accused utilized a backup vehicle, and the crime was aggravated by nighttime, by a band, and the use of a motor vehicle. Several accused, including the petitioners, were also alleged to be recidivists.
During trial, one co-accused, Ramoncito Aban, pleaded guilty to simple robbery. The prosecution presented witnesses, including bus conductress Thelma Andrade and passenger Gloria Tolentino, who identified the petitioners as participants. The Regional Trial Court convicted the petitioners of Highway Robbery. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, leading to this petition for review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the petitioners’ conviction for the crime of Highway Robbery/Brigandage under Presidential Decree No. 532.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the elements of Highway Robbery/Brigandage under P.D. No. 532, which punishes acts of piracy or highway robbery committed by any person or group of persons. The Court clarified that the law does not require the band to be organized for the purpose of committing robbery in a highway as a distinct element. The essential elements are: (1) the offense is committed by any person or group of persons; (2) it is committed along or in connection with any public highway; and (3) the acts constitute piracy or highway robbery under the Revised Penal Code.
The Court found these elements present. The petitioners, as part of an armed group, committed robbery against bus passengers on the South Luzon Expressway, a public highway. The use of a backup vehicle and the indiscriminate choice of the bus as a target confirmed the character of the crime as highway robbery. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated. The positive identification by prosecution witnesses, who had a clear view of the perpetrators during the incident, prevailed over the petitioners’ denial. The aggravating circumstances, including the use of a motor vehicle and the petitioners’ status as recidivists, were properly considered in imposing the penalty.