G.R. No. L-6771 / January 9, 1912
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FILOMENO DE TORRES, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On July 8, 1908, Nicomedes Pasia, a peddler, and his son Candido arrived in Pagsanjan, Laguna. They lodged in a house where the appellant, Filomeno de Torres, and Albino Magtibay were also staying. Nicomedes counted his sales proceeds of P540.50 in their presence. The next day, Nicomedes and his son left for Calamba by steamer, followed by Torres and Magtibay. On July 10, the four were seen traveling together on a trail in a wooded area called Madrecacao. A witness later heard the boy cry, “Why are you killing my father?” and saw Nicomedes lying on the ground with Torres dragging his body, while Magtibay chased the boy. Torres and Magtibay were later seen with bloodstains on their clothing, heading away from the scene. The bodies of Nicomedes and Candido, brutally killed, were found the next day. Magtibay was previously tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. Torres was subsequently arrested and similarly convicted for the complex crime of robbery with homicide.

ISSUE

Whether the penalty of death imposed on Filomeno de Torres for the complex crime of robbery with homicide is proper, considering the alleged aggravating circumstances of deliberate premeditation, abuse of superior strength, and uninhabited place.

RULING

Yes, the penalty of death is proper. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment. The penalty for robbery with homicide under the Penal Code is an indivisible penalty of either life imprisonment or death. The Court found no mitigating circumstances in favor of Torres. It upheld the presence of the generic aggravating circumstances of deliberate premeditation, abuse of superior strength, and commission in an uninhabited place. The Court rejected the defense’s argument that deliberate premeditation is inherent in robbery and should not be separately considered, citing Spanish jurisprudence that such circumstance can be isolated when the accused’s conductsuch as accompanying the victims to a place deemed suitable for the crimedemonstrates studied and persistent thought. Since the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties and aggravating circumstances were present without any mitigating circumstances to offset them, the greater penalty of death must be applied.