G.R. No. L-48057 August 19, 1982
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VICTORIO VENEZUELA, ET AL., accused. EXPEDITO MAGNO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
In the early morning of August 7, 1975, Saturnina Corpus was sleeping beside her common-law husband, Cirilo Maano, in their house in Leyte. She was awakened when Cirilo accidentally hit her. Upon waking, she heard someone shout “Podila” (shoot) three times and saw three men inside their house: appellant Expedito Magno, Victorio Venezuela, and Sotero Aras, Jr. The three attacked Cirilo. Sotero pinned Cirilo’s legs and stabbed him. Cirilo managed to stand, but Magno held him by the waist and took money from him. Venezuela then held Cirilo by the shoulder and stabbed him. Saturnina shouted for help, prompting Venezuela to lunge at her with a knife. She escaped by jumping out a window. The assailants fled after killing Cirilo. Estrella Parado, a neighbor, heard the commotion and witnessed the accused jumping from the house.
ISSUE
Whether the appellant is guilty of the complex crime of attempted robbery with homicide, or merely of homicide.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision, finding appellant Expedito Magno guilty of homicide, not attempted robbery with homicide. The Court acknowledged the proven facts of the killing but found the evidence for robbery insufficient to sustain the complex crime. The prosecution established that Magno held the victim by the waist and took money. However, the Court held that this act alone did not conclusively prove robbery as a motive for the intrusion. There was no evidence that the victim kept money at his waist or that the appellant had prior knowledge of it. The Court reasoned that if robbery were the intent, the perpetrators would have likely demanded money or searched for other valuables, which they did not do. Consequently, the element of robbery was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Absent conclusive proof of robbery, the killing could only be punished as homicide. The information did not allege any qualifying circumstances to elevate the crime to murder, even though the evidence suggested abuse of superior strength. The homicide was aggravated by abuse of superior strength, nighttime, and dwelling, with no mitigating circumstances. The penalty was modified to an indeterminate sentence of 12 years of prision mayor as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum. The civil indemnity was affirmed.