G.R. No. L-4962; April 27, 1957
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VICTOR BAQUERO, ET AL., defendants. ELADIO ORIARTE, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Chinaman Sia Mian owned a store in Singao, Cotabato, entrusted to Te Kian Giap alias Sergio Sia Su (Sia Su) in his absence. Defendant Carmelo Bangayceso was a helper who slept in the store’s second floor with Sia Su. On the evening of April 14, 1950, defendants Victor Baquero and Eladio Oriarte were at the store, where Baquero asked for and received a cigarette from Sia Su. Later, Baquero and Oriarte, along with Juanito Remulta, decided to rob the store. They waited until about 1:00 a.m., dug a hole under a wall to enter, and found Sia Su and Carmelo asleep upstairs. With the aid of a flashlight, they took turns hacking Sia Su, with Remulta doing most of the hacking. Awakened, Carmelo was asked by Baquero where the money was; out of fear, Carmelo indicated it was in the aparador and that the key was under Sia Su’s pillow. Baquero took the money (P600 per information, P480 per Baquero’s statement). Carmelo then jumped out the window and reported the robbery to assistant barrio lieutenant Agapito Remosora. Maria Abenoha, who heard Sia Su’s cries, also went to Remosora’s house. The group went to the store, where the dying Sia Su, upon Maria’s suggestion, identified his assailant as the man to whom he gave a cigarette the previous night—Victor Baquero. Capt. Lugtu of the Constabulary took Sia Su’s dying declaration (Exhibit C) confirming this. Sia Su died shortly after. Baquero, Oriarte, and Remulta were arrested and gave written statements (Exhibits D, E, F) admitting their roles. Carmelo also gave statements (Exhibits G, G1) but did not admit conspiracy. The four were charged with robbery with homicide. Remulta pleaded guilty and was sentenced separately. Baquero withdrew his appeal, leaving Oriarte and Carmelo as appellants.

ISSUE

1. Whether defendant Carmelo Bangayceso is guilty as an accomplice to the crime of robbery with homicide.
2. Whether defendant Eladio Oriarte is guilty as a principal to the crime of robbery with homicide.

RULING

1. No, defendant Carmelo Bangayceso is not guilty as an accomplice. The evidence is insufficient to convict him. His actions—fleeing the scene, reporting the crime, attempting to re-enter via the window (unaware of the dug hole), and only indicating the money and key location out of fear—show no conspiracy or voluntary participation. He is acquitted, with costs de oficio.
2. Yes, defendant Eladio Oriarte is guilty as a principal to the crime of robbery with homicide. His written statement, sworn before the Justice of Peace, admits his agreement to rob the store, participation in inflicting wounds on Sia Su, ownership of a bolo used, and wearing blood-stained pants. His claim of maltreatment by the Constabulary was rejected, as the Justice of Peace verified the statement’s voluntariness after sending the soldiers away. The guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt. Aggravating circumstances (dwelling, treachery, abuse of superior force, nighttime) are present, but for lack of sufficient votes for the death penalty, the penalty of reclusion perpetua is affirmed. The indemnity to the heirs of Sia Su is increased from P3,000 to P6,000. The decision of the trial court is affirmed with this modification, including the return of the P480 to the heirs.