G.R. No. L-42964. March 14, 1988.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO ESCABARTE alias “BOY,” GREGORIO SYGACO alias “KORAK,” and LAURO TOME, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The accused-appellants were charged with Robbery with Homicide for the killing of Anselmo Rollorata and the taking of cash and valuables from his house on May 31, 1973. The prosecution evidence established that appellants, who were known to the victim’s family, forcibly entered the Rollorata dwelling in Plaridel, Misamis Occidental, by breaking a window after midnight. They were armed and gained entry under the pretense of delivering a letter from a lawyer. Once inside, they forcibly took Anselmo from his room to the kitchen. His ten-year-old son, Ricardo, who secretly followed, witnessed Francisco Escabarte shoot his kneeling father in the back. The robbers then took a rifle, a wristwatch, a flashlight, and cash before fleeing.
The defense consisted of denial and alibi. Accused Lauro Tome also contested the admissibility of his extrajudicial confession. The trial court convicted all three appellants of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua. They appealed, challenging the credibility of the eyewitnesses (the victim’s wife and son), the rejection of their defense, the admission of Tome’s confession, and the finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellants of Robbery with Homicide based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modification. The Court found no reason to disturb the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility. The positive identification by the victim’s wife, Juana, and son, Ricardo, who knew the appellants personally and had ample opportunity to see them by the light of a lamp, was deemed credible and sufficient for conviction. Their testimonies were consistent and detailed. The defense of denial and alibi could not prevail over this positive identification. Regarding the extrajudicial confession of Lauro Tome, the Court noted it was merely corroborative of the other strong evidence of guilt, thus its admission, even if questioned, was not prejudicial.
The legal logic confirms the existence of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide. The robbery was established by the forcible taking of personal property. The homicide was proven by the eyewitness account of the killing. The intent to rob was evident from the appellants’ actions before and after the shooting, and the killing was committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, satisfying the elements of the special complex crime under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code. The Court noted the presence of aggravating circumstances, including evident premeditation and commission by a band, which would have warranted the death penalty, but this was proscribed by the 1987 Constitution . The Court thus sustained the penalty of reclusion perpetua but increased the civil indemnity to the heirs to P30,000.00. The decision was affirmed in all other respects.