G.R. No. L-7254 July 26, 1954
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TOMAS BUAMA, ET AL., defendants. DIOSCORO BODINO and ALEJO BODINO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of May 16, 1950, five armed men broke into the house of Cecilia Brizuela in Tabaco, Albay. They held the occupants at gunpoint, ransacked the house, and stole a bolo, a flashlight, and four chickens valued at P16.50. During the robbery, one of the intruders, Tomas Buama, dragged Salome Luciano (Cecilia’s daughter) downstairs and raped her. The following morning, police investigated. The occupants identified the raiders as Tomas Buama, Restituto Boneo, Simplicio Caña, Dioscoro Bodino, and Alejo Bodino. Police found incriminating evidence (a pistol, helmet, mask, and stolen bolo) at the houses of Buama, Boneo, and Caña, who later confessed and pleaded guilty. No evidence was found at the Bodinos’ house, but they were implicated in other robbery cases. At trial, Dioscoro and Alejo Bodino denied involvement, presented alibis, and challenged their identification, arguing the complainants could not have recognized them due to disguises (handkerchiefs, hats, a helmet, and one mask). The trial court convicted them of robbery in an inhabited house. The Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court, opining they should be guilty of robbery with rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the identification of appellants Dioscoro Bodino and Alejo Bodino as participants in the robbery was reliable despite the use of disguises, and whether they are liable for the rape committed by their co-accused during the robbery.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The identification of the appellants was reliable. The complainants had sufficient opportunity to observe the malefactors for about an hour under house lights, and the disguises (mostly handkerchiefs) were not absolute proof against recognition, especially since the appellants were long-known figures. Their names were given to police before any arrests were made. Their alibis were weak and insufficient to overcome this positive identification. The crime committed is robbery in band with rape under Article 296(2) of the Revised Penal Code. Appellants are liable as principals because they acted in concert with the group, and although they did not commit the rape, they were present and did nothing to prevent it. The aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and use of disguise attended the crime. The penalty is reclusion perpetua. The claim that the complaint was defective for being signed by the offended party is without merit, as robbery with rape is prosecutable de oficio. The sentence was modified: appellants are guilty of robbery in band with rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. They are ordered to indemnify Salome Luciano P4,000 and pay P16.50 for the stolen articles, jointly and severally with their co-accused.