G.R. No. L-30281 August 2, 1978
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff, vs. CELESTINO GARILLO Y ORJEL alias CELING (deceased) and FEDERICO FERNANDEZ Y ARELLANO alias PUTOL, accused.

FACTS

Lim Tao Sing, owner of the Excel Ice Drop Factory in Pasay City, was robbed and killed on the night of November 1, 1968. Earlier that evening, he and his uncle had counted P3,200.00 and jewelry valued at P1,800.00, placing them in a trunk in Lim’s bedroom. Factory worker Henry Barillo, sleeping on the ground floor, was awakened and tied up by his co-worker, Alejandro “Tangkad” Buco, while another accomplice pointed a gun at him. Barillo saw several men, including Tangkad, enter through a hole in the wall and proceed upstairs. He then heard a gunshot and moans. The men later fled. Police found Lim Tao Sing dead from multiple stab wounds, the room ransacked, and the trunk emptied.
Three individuals—Celestino Garillo, Alejandro Buco, and Federico Fernandez—were charged with Robbery with Homicide. Buco pleaded guilty and was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Garillo and Fernandez pleaded not guilty but were convicted and sentenced to death by the Circuit Criminal Court. Garillo died in prison, and his appeal was dismissed. The case proceeded on automatic review for Fernandez, who denied being a co-conspirator.

ISSUE

Whether accused-appellant Federico Fernandez is guilty of the crime of Robbery with Homicide as a co-conspirator.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court acquitted Federico Fernandez. The Court, through Justice Concepcion Jr., held that while a conspiracy to rob the factory was established, Fernandez’s involvement was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. Fernandez admitted he was informed of the plan but claimed he only pretended to act as a lookout out of fear of Tangkad, a known gang member, and that he left the scene before the conspirators broke into the factory. The Court found this claim of desistance credible.
The legal logic centers on Article 6, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code, which exempts from criminal liability those who spontaneously desist from the commission of a felony. The Court applied the doctrine of locus poenitentiae, recognizing a place for repentance where a conspirator may abandon the criminal design before its execution. Fernandez’s act of leaving prior to the breaking of the wall and the actual robbery constituted such voluntary desistance. The prosecution’s reliance on his flight to Pampanga after the crime was deemed insufficient as circumstantial evidence, being neither conclusive proof of guilt nor adequate to substitute for direct evidence of his participation in the conspiracy itself. Consequently, his guilt was not established to the required moral certainty.