G.R. No. L-5235
The United States v. Fausto Parales and Alejandro Lapena
August 18, 1909

FACTS:
Late on the night of April 3, 1908, Fausto Parales, Alejandro Lapena, and other unidentified individuals, some armed with revolvers, attacked two adjoining houses in Bacoor, Cavite.

First, they entered the house of Vicenta Gervasio (wife of Crispulo Eusebio), who was alone with her three young children. They searched the house, pointed revolvers at her, and stole a watch, chain, earrings, a hat, and shoes/slippers, totaling P41. Vicenta recognized Parales (who cautioned her against speaking aloud) and Lapena.

Immediately after, the malefactors broke into the adjoining house of Dominga Espiritu. Two armed thieves, including Fausto Parales, entered, demanded P700 (allegedly deposited by Crispulo), and upon finding no money, stole P3 in copper coins, a rosary, earrings, and shoes, totaling P23.50. Dominga recognized Parales. The complaint, proceedings, and judgment referred to only one crime of robbery encompassing both incidents.

The provincial fiscal charged Esteban Celestino, Fausto Parales, and Alejandro Lapena with robo en cuadrilla. The Court of First Instance of Cavite acquitted Esteban Celestino but sentenced Parales and Lapena to three years, eight months, and one day of presidio correccional. Parales and Lapena appealed the judgment.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the crime committed was robo en cuadrilla or simple robbery.
2. What is the appropriate penalty for appellants Fausto Parales and Alejandro Lapena, considering the proven facts and aggravating circumstances.

RULING:
1. The Supreme Court ruled that the crime was simple robbery, not robo en cuadrilla. While there were more than three thieves, it was not established that all of them were armed. Thus, the deed fell under articles 502 and 503, No. 5, of the Penal Code, which defines simple robbery.
2. The Court found Fausto Parales and Alejandro Lapena guilty beyond reasonable doubt as proven authors of the crime. Parales was recognized by both victims, and Lapena by Vicenta Gervasio, with the presumption that he also participated in the second robbery given it was committed by the same gang.
In the commission of the crime, two aggravating circumstances were present under Article 10 of the Penal Code:
No. 15: Executed in an inhabited house.
No. 20: Committed in the darkness and silence of night (nocturnity).
There were no mitigating circumstances to offset these. Therefore, the maximum degree of the penalty for simple robbery should be imposed.

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance. Fausto Parales and Alejandro Lapena were each sentenced to seven years of presidio mayor, to suffer the accessory penalties of Article 57 of the Penal Code, to jointly and severally return the stolen articles or indemnify their value to the injured parties (without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency under Article 51), and each to pay one-third of the costs of both instances.