G.R. No. L-18997 January 31, 1966
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BAUTIL PEDRO, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The accused Bautil Pedro, Dimaaring Dimapinto, Florentino Cababa, Pantaran Macatamok, and Panontongan Amua were charged with robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide before the Court of First Instance of Lanao. The case against Dimapinto was dismissed for lack of evidence. After trial, the remaining four were convicted and sentenced to death. The prosecution evidence established that on February 27, 1956, the victims, including spouses Emiliano and Francisca Momo and Agapito Tan, were traveling on a truck after selling copra. Bautil Pedro boarded the truck earlier. The truck was fired upon; driver Pedro Mercado was shot and wounded. Bautil Pedro was identified as the shooter, while Florentino Cababa, Panontongan Amua, and Pantaran Macatamok, armed with guns, stood guard. Agapito Tan was robbed at gunpoint of cash and valuables. Emiliano Momo was shot, and before dying, he identified his assailants as “Moro Bautil and his companions.” The appellants raised defenses of alibi and claimed their extrajudicial confessions were extracted through maltreatment.

ISSUE

The main issues for review concern the correctness of the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty, including the presence of aggravating circumstances, conspiracy, and the applicability of the mitigating circumstance of minority for some appellants.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty for two appellants. The crime committed is robbery with homicide under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code. The trial court correctly found the presence of the aggravating circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, commission by a band, and in an uninhabited place. Conspiracy among the appellants was inferred from their concerted actions: Bautil Pedro fired the shots while his co-accused, armed, stood guard and carried out the robbery. However, the trial court erred in not considering the mitigating circumstance of minority for Panontongan Amua (16 years old at trial) and Pantaran Macatamok (15 years old). For Bautil Pedro and Florentino Cababa, the imposition of the death penalty was correct and affirmed. For Panontongan Amua and Pantaran Macatamok, minority lowers the penalty by one degree to reclusion temporal, to be imposed in the medium degree. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, they were sentenced to an indeterminate penalty with a minimum of not less than 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor and a maximum of not less than 17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years of reclusion temporal. The decision was affirmed in all other respects.