G.R. No. L-4165
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SIMEON GAMALINDA AND FOUR OTHERS UNKNOWN, defendants, S. GAMALINDA, appellant.
February 8, 1908

FACTS:

On the night of June 15, 1905, Simeon Gamalinda, armed with a revolver, along with four other individuals armed with bolos, appeared at the house of Moises Santiago. They compelled Moises and his brother Cenon Santiago to come out, tied them up, and Gamalinda kept watch. By Gamalinda’s order, the four unknown men stole four carabaos, valued at P400, from the brothers’ corral. As they left, Gamalinda fired two shots to prevent the victims from pursuing them. The victims recognized Gamalinda as the armed leader and commander of the group.

A few days later, Lucas Santiago (Cenon’s son), accompanied by two others, located the stolen carabaos near a hut. However, five armed individuals, including Gamalinda (again armed with a revolver), emerged from the hut and prevented them from recovering the animals. The carabaos were never recovered.

Upon the filing of a complaint, the trial judge, on March 4, 1907, sentenced Simeon Gamalinda to fifteen years of cadena temporal, accessory penalties, and ordered him to return the stolen carabaos or indemnify the owners in the amount of P300, plus costs. Gamalinda appealed the judgment, attempting to present an alibi that he was at his mother-in-law’s house on the night of the robbery.

ISSUE:

1. Whether Simeon Gamalinda was guilty of the crime of robo en cuadrilla (robbery committed by a band) despite his alibi.
2. Whether the penalty imposed by the lower court was in accordance with the law, considering Gamalinda’s role as the leader of the band and the presence of an aggravating circumstance.

RULING:

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court.

1. The Court found that the facts presented were duly proven and constituted the crime of robo en cuadrilla, defined and punished under Articles 502, 503 No. 5, in connection with Article 504 of the Penal Code. The positive identification by the two injured parties, Moises and Cenon Santiago, who unequivocally recognized Gamalinda as the armed individual who commanded the robbers and fired shots to intimidate them, directly established his participation. This was further corroborated by Lucas Santiago’s subsequent identification of Gamalinda among the armed men who prevented the recovery of the carabaos. The defense’s alibi was deemed insufficient to overcome this direct and positive evidence of Gamalinda’s guilt as a principal by direct participation and the chief of the band.

2. The Court found that the penalty imposed was correct. The aggravating circumstance of nocturnity was present, with no mitigating circumstances. Since Gamalinda was proven to be the chief of the band, Article 504 of the Penal Code mandated the imposition of the next higher penalty to that prescribed by Article 503, No. 5. Article 503, No. 5, for robbery of carabaos (valued between P250 and P1,250), prescribes presidio mayor in its medium degree. The next higher penalty is presidio mayor in its maximum degree to cadena temporal in its medium degree. The fifteen years of cadena temporal imposed fell within this range and was therefore in accordance with the law.

Additionally, Gamalinda was sentenced to jointly and severally reimburse the owners for the value of the four stolen carabaos (P300, as ordered by the lower court, while noting the proven value was P400), with such other co-principals as may be captured, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency due to the nature of the principal penalty.