G.R. No. L-28163 January 30, 1970
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TEOFILO GANDE, ET AL., defendants, TEOFILO GANDE, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Teofilo Gande was convicted by the Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental for robbery with quadruple homicide and sentenced to reclusion perpetua, with indemnities. The prosecution evidence showed that on September 25, 1965, in the remote, mountainous barrio of Tuno, the Subano couple Sayawon Lumigaw and Dagaw Sumingit, their son Amping, and daughter-in-law Dana were killed in their house. Prosecution witness Teofilo Sandalan, a minor, testified that he and Sayawon returned from a cockfight at around 5:00 PM and found Teofilo Gande, his brother Victoriano, and a third man armed with bolos in the house. After Sandalan left with his share of the cock, he heard a woman’s shout, returned, and from under the house saw Teofilo Gande cutting Sayawon’s neck. The four victims were found dead the next day. Another witness, Anselmo Gumalay, saw Teofilo Gande and two others heading toward the victims’ house earlier that afternoon. The prosecution also presented an unsigned confession (Exhibit “A”) taken by PC officers, which Teofilo Gande later repudiated, claiming it was extracted through maltreatment. The defense presented an alibi, claiming Teofilo Gande was at a cooperative farm work all day, which the trial court rejected. The trial court acquitted co-accused Victoriano Gande on reasonable doubt but convicted Teofilo Gande.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting Teofilo Gande of the complex crime of robbery with quadruple homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the judgment. It held that Teofilo Gande could not be convicted of robbery with quadruple homicide due to insufficient evidence for robbery and conspiracy. The unsigned confession was rejected as unreliable, given the circumstances of its taking and the appellant’s claim of torture. There was no independent evidence proving the alleged robbery; the prosecution failed to prove that the P2,000.00 in coins reportedly kept in the house was still there or was taken. Thus, the essential elements of robbery—intent to gain and unlawful taking—were not established. Furthermore, the evidence did not prove a conspiracy among Teofilo Gande, his brother, and the third man to commit the crime, as their mere presence together did not imply a common plan. The positive identification by witness Sandalan only proved that Teofilo Gande killed Sayawon Lumigaw. There was no proof that he also killed the other three victims. Consequently, the crime committed was a single homicide, aggravated by its commission in the victim’s dwelling but mitigated by the appellant’s illiteracy and being a member of a cultural minority (Subano). Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty was reduced. The Court found Teofilo Gande guilty of homicide and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of not less than 10 years of prision mayor to not more than 17 years of reclusion temporal, and to indemnify the heirs of Sayawon Lumigaw in the amount of P12,000.00.