G.R. No. 48801; August 28, 1942
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARCELO LAREZA, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The defendants-appellants were charged with robbery. The information alleged that the robbery was committed “by passing through a hole on the ceiling of said bazar, an opening not intended for entrance or egress.” The defendants pleaded guilty. The crime was committed on the occasion of war, which is an aggravating circumstance.

ISSUE

1. Whether the information for robbery was sufficient despite its failure to specifically allege violence, intimidation, or force upon things as required under Article 293 of the Revised Penal Code.
2. How the penalty should be determined considering the plea of guilty and the aggravating circumstance of the crime being committed on the occasion of war.

RULING

1. On the sufficiency of the information: The information is sufficient. The allegation that the accused entered “by passing through a hole on the ceiling… an opening not intended for entrance or egress” constitutes a proper charge under Article 302(1) of the Revised Penal Code. Article 302 is complete in itself. An information based on it need not allege the elements of violence, intimidation, or force required under the general robbery provision in Article 293. It is sufficient to allege any of the five specific methods enumerated in Article 302. Each method implies force or its equivalent. Entrance through an opening not intended for entrance (par. 1) is deemed by law to have the same effect as actual force, such as breaking a wall or door.
2. On the penalty and disposition: The defendants’ plea of guilty offsets the aggravating circumstance that the crime was committed on the occasion of war. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, each accused is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of three months of arresto mayor to one year and eight months of prision correccional. The stolen property carried away by the appellants must be returned to the owner.