GR L 61119; (November, 1984) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-61119. November 14, 1984
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ANGEL RAMILLANO, EDISON PASAFORTE and SAMUEL PASAFORTE, JR., Defendants, EDISON PASAFORTE and SAMUEL PASAFORTE, JR., Defendants-Appellants.
FACTS
Carlos Ngo, owner of Aeroplane Shoe Palace in Cebu City, was found dead, hogtied, and with multiple stab wounds inside his closed store on June 15, 1980. The store’s safe was open, and cash, jewelry, and a stereo cassette recorder valued at P102,000 were missing. The investigation pointed to security guard Angel Ramillano (at large) and brothers Edison and Samuel Pasaforte, Jr. as the perpetrators. An information for robbery with homicide was filed against them.
During arraignment, Edison Pasaforte pleaded guilty despite judicial admonition, while Samuel Pasaforte, Jr. pleaded not guilty. After trial, the lower court convicted both and, appreciating several aggravating circumstances against the mitigating circumstance of Edison’s plea, sentenced both to death. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court on automatic review.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellants and in imposing the death penalty.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties. The trial court’s factual findings, particularly regarding Samuel Pasaforte, Jr.’s guilt based on witness testimonies and his brother’s credible extra-judicial confession, were upheld. The Court, however, corrected the appreciation of aggravating circumstances. It ruled that nighttime and abuse of superior strength are inherent in treachery and cannot be separately considered. Abuse of confidence and cruelty were not sufficiently proven.
For Edison Pasaforte, his voluntary plea of guilty was a mitigating circumstance, offset by the proven aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation, resulting in the penalty of reclusion perpetua. For Samuel Pasaforte, Jr., with no mitigating circumstance, the proper penalty under the law was also reclusion perpetua, as the Court lacked the necessary votes to affirm the death penalty. Consequently, the Court reduced both sentences to reclusion perpetua and increased the civil indemnity for the victim’s death from P12,000 to P30,000. The judgment was affirmed in all other respects.