G.R. No. L-2364

FACTS:
Arcadio Hernandez, Panganiban, and another were charged with brigandage under Act No. 518 . The trial court acquitted Hernandez and the third defendant but convicted Panganiban of brigandage and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment. The evidence established that five individuals stole carabaos. Panganiban did not participate in the actual robbery. After the fact, and with knowledge of the crime, he intervened to demand and receive a sum of 100 pesos from the owner, Leandro Uy-Changco, as a ransom for the return of the stolen carabaos.

ISSUE:
Whether the trial court correctly convicted Panganiban of the crime of brigandage.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction. The facts did not constitute brigandage, as there was no evidence that the perpetrators were members of an organized band of brigands as defined by Act No. 518 . The proven facts constituted the crime of robbery by a gang. Panganiban’s role, performed with knowledge of the robbery, was limited to acting as an accessory after the fact by profiting from the ransom. Applying the Penal Code, he was liable as an accessory to the crime of robbery. The penalty for an accessory is two degrees lower than that for the principal crime. The Court sentenced Panganiban to pay a fine of 300 pesos (Philippine currency) and to restore the 100 pesos to Leandro Uy-Changco, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. The defense’s motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence was denied, as the evidence sought only to impeach a rebuttal witness and would not alter the result given the other conclusive testimony.