G.R. No. L-13384; June 30, 1960
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Paquito de Leon alias Ito, et al., defendants. Elino Mallare, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

In the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, twelve persons were charged with robbery in band with homicide. One accused, Ismael Lastimosa, was discharged to become a state witness. Another, Alfonso Mendoza, pleaded guilty. Only three—Paquito de Leon, Elino Mallare, and Bening Apolonio—were tried, as the others remained at large. After trial, Bening Apolonio was acquitted, while Paquito de Leon and Elino Mallare were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Alejo Natividad. This appeal concerns only Elino Mallare.
The evidence established that on the night of March 5, 1957, a group of about 15 men, including Mallare, De Leon, and others, gathered at the house of Jog Sarenas in Llanera, Nueva Ecija. They discussed a mission where they expected to get at least P1,000. Mallare and De Leon produced firearms (a Thompson submachine gun and two carbines). The group proceeded to the house of Victoriano Natividad in Barrio Caridad. They posted guards at the gates, and Mallare, De Leon, and others entered the yard. Pretending to be PC soldiers and asking for wine or Coca-Cola, they were recognized by Victoriano Natividad and his wife, Leonora Pentecosta. When the household became apprehensive, Victoriano called his neighbor, Braulio Ventura, for help. A struggle ensued; Ventura grappled with an armed man and was shot by another. Victoriano Natividad fired back, hitting one assailant. During a volley of shots, Victoriano was wounded, and his son, Alejo Natividad, was shot dead. The attackers rescued their wounded comrade and fled, but not before Mallare and De Leon declared they would not leave without loot or would burn the neighborhood.
The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Ismael Lastimosa, Victoriano Natividad, Leonora Pentecosta, and Braulio Ventura, who positively identified Mallare as a participant. On March 18, 1957, the Natividad spouses identified Mallare in a police lineup. Furthermore, six days after the crime, Constabulary operatives recovered the firearms used (Exhibits G, H, I) from Mallare, who dug them up from a creek near his house. Ballistic examination showed that empty shells found at the crime scene were fired from these weapons. Mallare’s defense of alibi—that he was sick at his aunt’s house since March 3, 1957—was discredited by the trial court.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting Elino Mallare of the crime of robbery in band with homicide based on the evidence presented.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The factual findings of the trial court were upheld, as there was no reason to doubt the positive identification of Mallare by multiple eyewitnesses who had no improper motive to testify against him. Their testimony was corroborated by the recovery of the firearms from Mallare and the ballistic evidence linking those weapons to the crime scene. The Court also found no error in the discharge of Ismael Lastimosa as a state witness, noting that even if a witness lacks some qualifications under the rules, his testimony is not automatically discarded.
The Court ruled that Mallare, in conspiracy with his co-accused (particularly Paquito de Leon and Alfonso Mendoza), entered the house of Victoriano Natividad with intent to rob and, in the course thereof, seriously wounded Victoriano Natividad and Braulio Ventura and killed Alejo Natividad. The crime is robbery in band with homicide under Article 297 of the Revised Penal Code, punishable by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. The penalty was properly imposed in its maximum degree due to the presence of several aggravating circumstances: nocturnity, dwelling, and band. The appealed judgment was affirmed, with the modification that Mallare’s civil liability is solidary with his co-convicts.