GR 39511; (April, 1980) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-39511, L-39512, L-39513 April 28, 1980
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOVITO MERCADO, ET AL., JESUS MERCADO, and TEOFILO QUIMZON, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
On the evening of February 17, 1972, a robbery was perpetrated at the house of Antonio Moron in La Paz, Leyte. At least seven armed men, some with firearms and others with bolos, forced their way through the front door. Upon entry, two immediately pointed guns at Antonio Moron and his wife, Remedios, ordering them not to move while accomplices ransacked the house and stole cash and valuables. During the incident, Antonio Moron was shot. He was hospitalized, operated on, and died on February 25, 1972, from the gunshot wounds which caused severe internal injuries and peritonitis.
Separate Informations for Robbery in Band with Homicide were filed against Jovito Mercado, Gregorio Silvio, Estanislao Dedase, Jesus Mercado, and Teofilo Quimzon. After a joint trial, the Court of First Instance of Leyte found all accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. The trial court appreciated two aggravating circumstances—band and dwelling—with no mitigating circumstances, and imposed the death penalty. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly appreciated the aggravating circumstances of band and dwelling to justify the imposition of the death penalty.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The legal logic is grounded on the proper application of aggravating circumstances under the Revised Penal Code. The court found the existence of a band, as the crime was committed by more than three armed malefactors who acted in concert. The appellants’ contention that Moron was armed and could have resisted was rejected; the overwhelming number and arms of the perpetrators created a situation of intimidation that neutralized any potential defense, satisfying the legal definition of a band.
Regarding dwelling, the court clarified that this aggravating circumstance is incurred whenever a crime is committed in the victim’s residence, violating its sanctity. It is not contingent upon a forcible entry or trespass achieved against the owner’s will. The essence is the commission of the crime within the dwelling itself. Since the robbery with homicide occurred inside Moron’s house, the circumstance was correctly applied. With two aggravating circumstances and no mitigating factors, the imposition of the supreme penalty of death was in accordance with Article 63, in relation to Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code. The decision was affirmed in all respects.