G.R. No. L-41008, June 18, 1987
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARTURO PECATO, ET AL., accused. FELIX PECATO AND ERENEO PERUDA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of November 1, 1971, in Gigaquit, Surigao del Norte, four armed men entered the small house of the elderly Felix Larong, his wife Luciana, and their daughter Uldarica. The intruders, later identified as Arturo Pecato, Felix Pecato, Victoriano Leyros, and Ereneo Peruda, ordered the family to lie face down on the floor and demanded money. When Felix Larong replied he had none, he was shot and killed. The assailants then took P350.00. The accused were charged with Robbery with Homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. Arturo Pecato died before trial, and Victoriano Leyros remained at large, leaving appellants Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda to stand trial.
The prosecution presented eyewitness accounts from Luciana and Uldarica Larong, who positively identified the appellants as among the armed intruders. The defense consisted of alibis, claiming they were elsewhere during the incident. The trial court convicted the appellants of Robbery with Violence Against or Intimidation of Persons, appreciating the aggravating circumstances of treachery, disregard of rank, band, abuse of superior strength, and nighttime. With no mitigating circumstances, the court imposed the death penalty, prompting this automatic review.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the guilt of appellants Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda for the crime of Robbery with Homicide was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court upheld the trial court’s findings, giving full credence to the positive and categorical testimonies of the victims, Luciana and Uldarica Larong, who had ample opportunity to identify the appellants inside their illuminated house. Their testimonies were consistent and remained unshaken on cross-examination. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected, as it could not prevail over the positive identification and was not physically impossible to be at the crime scene.
On the legal classification, the Court clarified that the crime committed was Robbery with Homicide, a special complex crime under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code, not simple robbery with violence. The homicide was committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery. All aggravating circumstances alleged were duly proven, including treachery, as the attack was sudden and rendered the elderly victim defenseless while lying down. However, the Court ruled that the imposition of the death penalty was erroneous. Following the prevailing doctrine and the 1987 Constitution which prohibited the death penalty, the Supreme Court modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnity was also increased to P30,000.00.