GR L 16176; (July, 1962) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-16176; July 19, 1962
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ISMAEL LAMPITOC, ET AL., defendants, ISMAEL LAMPITOC, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
In the early morning of June 18, 1957, a group of armed men attacked the house of spouses Aurelio Tagata and Brigida Baingan in Ilagan, Isabela. They demanded money, and after receiving P2,000, forcibly broke down the door. During the ensuing struggle, Aurelio Tagata and his son Petronilo were shot and killed. The assailants fled, leaving behind items including a buri hat. Investigation led to the arrest of several suspects. Co-accused Nemesio Gozum voluntarily surrendered and confessed, implicating Ismael Lampitoc and others. Other co-accused also executed extrajudicial confessions naming Lampitoc as a participant. Honorato Tagata, another son, identified Lampitoc at the barracks. A Constabulary Captain testified that Lampitoc initially confessed his participation but refused to sign the statement after his father-in-law arrived.
ISSUE
Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of appellant Ismael Lampitoc for the complex crime of robbery in band with double homicide.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic rests on the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found a combination of credible circumstances: the positive identification by eyewitness Honorato Tagata; the buri hat found at the crime scene declared to be Lampitoc’s; the confessions of his co-accused consistently implicating him; and the testimony of Captain Cada regarding Lampitoc’s own oral admission of participation. While the unsigned confession alone is insufficient, it forms part of a credible chain of circumstantial evidence. The Court held that these circumstances, taken together, produce a moral certainty of Lampitoc’s participation, overcoming his defense of alibi which was supported only by relatives. The crime, committed by a band with homicide, warranted the penalty of reclusion perpetua, as the requisite votes for the death penalty were not obtained. The decision of the trial court was affirmed in toto.