People v. Reyes : 153119 : April 13, 2004 : J. Callejo Sr : En Banc :
[G.R. NO. 153119.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v.
REYES y MAGANO,
D E C I S I O N
CALLEJO, SR., J.:
Before us on automatic appeal is the Decision1 of the Regional Trial Court of Sta. Cruz, Laguna, Branch 28, convicting the
appellant Antonio Reyes y Magano of robbery with homicide and sentencing him to
suffer the penalty of death.
The appellant was charged with robbery with homicide in an
Information, the accusatory portion of which reads:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
That on or about June 11, 1998, in the municipality of Lumban,
Province of Laguna, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, with intent to gain, and while conveniently armed with a
bolo, by means of violence against or intimidation of person, did then and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, steal and carry away one (1)
ladies wristwatch marked Rolex; one (1) gold bracelet; one (1) gold ring with
birthstone of Jade; one (1) Pass Book in the name of the victim/Aurora Lagrada,
in the total amount of
P80,000. 00, all belonging to Aurora Lagrada, to
her damage and prejudice, in the aforementioned amount, that by reason or on
the occasion of the said robbery accused with intent to kill and while
conveniently armed with a bolo, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously attack, assault and stab one AURORA LAGRADA several times in the
different parts of her body, which directly caused her instantaneous death, to
the damage and prejudice of her surviving heirs.
CONTRARY TO LAW.2 cralawred
The appellant was arraigned, assisted by counsel, and entered a
plea of not guilty.
The Case for the Prosecution3 cralawred
Dr. Aurora Lagrada, a spinster of about seventy years old, lived
alone in her two-storey house located at General Luna Street, Barangay
Balimbingan, Lumban, Laguna.
was the sole proprietor of the Neal Construction and Supplies located at No. 90
General Luna Street, Lumban, Laguna.4 The appellants house was about four to five meters away from the doctors house.
He lived with his mother and brother.
At around 11:00 p. m. on June 11, 1998, Barangay Captain William
Magpantay received a radio report from barangay kagawad that someone managed to
gain entry into the house of Lagrada, and that she had shouted for help.
Magpantay, a barangay councilman and a
barangay tanod responded and proceeded to the house of the doctor.
When they knocked on the door, no one
responded. The barangay captain then proceeded to the Lumban Police Station and
reported the matter to the policemen. SPO2 Maximo Gonzales and SPO1 Pedro
Nacor, Jr. responded to the report and, accompanied by Magpantay, proceeded to
the house of Lagrada.5 cralawred
When they arrived at the house, the policemen passed by the
garage and opened the door.
the bloodied Lagrada, naked from the waist up, sprawled sidewise on the floor
opposite the sink near the kitchen.6 Near the cadaver was a bolo (itak). Gonzales took custody of the bolo.7 Magpantay noticed that Lagradas neighbors, anxious to know what had happened,
were in the vicinity. The appellant, however, was nowhere to be found.8 cralawred
Magpantay and the policemen went to the appellants house. The
appellants mother and brother informed them that the latter was in Barangay
Concepcion.9 Magpantay, Barangay Chairman Floro Bulderon and the policemen proceeded to the
place, but failed to locate the appellant.
They then returned to the Lumban Police Station where Noel Saniste (Samonte)
told them that the appellant was in the vicinity of the town plaza in Sta.
Cruz, Laguna.10 In a mobile police car, the policemen and Magpantay rushed to the place and saw
the appellant in the town plaza on board a tricycle, apparently on his way to
the Kapalaran Bus Station in that town.
The appellant was handcuffed and boarded in the mobile police car.
He was told that he was a suspect in the
killing of Lagrada.11 While the car was on its way to Lumban, Gonzales ordered Magpantay to frisk the
Magpantay did so, and found
the following: two watches - a Rolex and Wittnauer in the right pocket of the
appellants pants; bank passbook no. 164764 issued by the Solid Bank under the
name of Lagrada; a gold bracelet and a gold ring; and in the appellants left
pocket, the amount of
Magpantay turned over the articles and money to Gonzales.12 cralawred
The policemen proceeded to the house of the appellant where they
found a pair of slippers and the green-colored t-shirt which the appellant wore
when he broke into Lagradas house.13 At the police station, Gonzales and Nacor, Jr. turned over the appellant to
SPO2 Benedicto del Mundo who was designated as the investigator-on-case.14 By then, it was about 1:30 a. m. of June 12, 1998. The incident was placed in the police blotter.15 cralawred
In the meantime, the appellant was bothered by his conscience and
stated that he wanted to execute an extrajudicial confession.16 Del Mundo informed the appellant of his right to be assisted by counsel of his
He also asked the appellant
if he had any lawyer.
replied that he had none, and asked Del Mundo to procure a lawyer to assist
Del Mundo managed to locate Atty.
Wilfredo Paraiso, a practicing lawyer in Lumban, Laguna, then President of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Laguna Chapter, and a member of the Knights
of Columbus. At that time, Atty. Paraiso was at the patio of the Catholic
church talking with fellow knights after participating in the Independence Day
parade.17 Del Mundo informed Atty. Paraiso that policemen had just arrested and detained
the appellant, and that the latter had expressed his desire to execute an
extra-judicial confession for which the assistance of counsel was needed.
Del Mundo asked Atty. Paraiso to assist the
appellant. The lawyer informed the appellant of his constitutional rights,
including his right to counsel, and told the appellant that he was volunteering
his services to assist him.
appellant agreed to be assisted by Atty. Paraiso.18 cralawred
Atty. Paraiso then explained to the appellant his constitutional
right to remain silent; that if he did not want to make any confession, it was
his right to do so; and that any admission he made in his confession may be
used against him.
The appellant told
Atty. Paraiso that he would proceed with his confession because his conscience
Atty. Paraiso inquired
from the appellant if he had been forced, coerced and intimidated into agreeing
to give a confession, or if somebody had offered to give him any reward in
consideration of any statement he would give to the investigator. The appellant
replied that he was not intimidated, coerced nor forced into giving a
Del Mundo, nevertheless, enumerated and explained to the
appellant his constitutional rights before commencing with his investigation in
the presence of Atty. Paraiso.20 After the investigation, Del Mundo showed the sworn statement to Atty. Paraiso
and the appellant.
explained the contents of the sworn statement to the appellant. The latter then
signed on top of his typewritten name on page 1 thereof, on the left margin of
page 2, and atop his typewritten name on page 3. Atty. Paraiso followed suit.
However, it being a holiday, there was no public officer available in
the municipal building before whom the appellant could swear to the truth of
Del Mundo requested
Atty. Paraiso, being a notary public, to notarize the sworn statement. Paraiso
agreed and affixed his signature above his typewritten name on page 3 thereof,
as Notary Public.21 cralawred
Pictures of the articles seized from the appellant were taken,
including the bolo, his green t-shirt and the pair of slippers. The appellant
was made to stand beside a table on top of which the said articles were placed
and photographed.22 cralawred
On June 15, 1998, Dr. Leoncia M. delos Reyes, performed an
autopsy on the cadaver of Lagrada and submitted her postmortem report which
contained her findings, viz:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
Autopsy Report June 12,
1998, 2:30 AM
Subject: Aurora Lagrada y Macabuhay, 74 years old, female, single,
retired government official who was found dead in her residence at Gen. Luna
Brgy. Balimbingan, Lumban, Laguna, on June 11, 1998.
Cadaver in a state of rigor mortis, in right
lateral position, both hands and arms clenched towards the chest. Both legs are
flexed, tongue bitten and slightly protruding, bleeding from the mouth with
clots. Said cadaver wearing bermuda short and blouse almost worn off exposing
the upper half of the body. Pool of (sic) around the body and floor.
1. Wound incised. 3x1 cms.,
submammary area, 3 cms. from the midline through and through to the back (point
2. Wound incised 2 cms. infra-scapular area,
right. (point of exit).
3. Wound incised, 3 cms. neck, left, oozing
No intra-thoracic nor intra-abdominal
hemorrhage all internal organs intact.
Underwear intact, no signs of external
violence, perineum intact and dry.
Cause of Death:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
Hemorrhagic Shock.23 cralawred
Dr. Delos Reyes also signed LagradasCertificate of Death.24 cralawred
Gonzales and Nacor, Jr. executed a Joint Affidavit on the
incident.25 Norma Quetulio executed a sworn statement26 in which she stated that her sister, Aurora Lagrada, owned the ring, the
bracelet, and the two watches which were confiscated from the appellant, and
that the said articles were worth
P80,000. 00.27 She testified that before Lagrada was killed, the latter was employed by the
AMA Computer College, Sta. Cruz, Laguna, as Professor 2, with a monthly salary
of P2,000. 00, later increased to P5,700. 00 a month; and, being a
retired public school teacher, she was also receiving a monthly pension of P3,000. 00
from the Social Security System. The victim was also the sole proprietor of the
Neal Construction and Supplies.28
The Case for the Appellant
The appellant denied any involvement in the killing of Lagrada
and of robbing her of money and pieces of jewelry.
The appellant testified that he was never investigated by Del
Mundo. He did not hire Atty. Wilfredo Paraiso as his counsel to assist him
while being investigated by the policemen.
Del Mundo merely referred the lawyer to him.29 The appellant claimed that he had no conference with the lawyer before and
after his custodial investigation.
merely affixed his signature on a piece of paper with some writings on it when
it was presented to him. This was after the policemen threatened him at the
station. The signature above the typewritten name, Antonio Reyes, on the third
page of the statement30 was not his signature.
Contrary to the
extrajudicial confession, he finished third year in high school.
After trial, the court rendered judgment convicting the appellant
of the crime charged.
portion of the decision reads:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
WHEREFORE, IN THE LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the
Court finds the accused ANTONIO REYES y MAGANO, GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT,
as PRINCIPAL of the offense of ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE as alleged in the
Information and defined and punished under Art. 294, No. 1 of the Revised Penal
Code, as amended by the DEATH PENALTY LAW, and further taking into
consideration against the accused the aggravating circumstances of his
commission of the offense in the dwelling of the offended party without any
provocation given by the latter and the complete disregard of the respect due
to the offended party on account of her age and sex and without any mitigating
circumstance that would offset the same, hereby sentences the accused to suffer
the SUPREME PENALTY OF DEATH and to pay the heirs of the deceased AURORA
LAGRADA as represented by Maria, Godofredo, Norma, Herminia, Edna and
Magdalena, all surnamed LAGRADA the sum of
P50,000. 00 as civil indemnity
for the death of Aurora Lagrada and P65,000. 00 for funeral expenses or a
total amount of P115,000. 00 and to pay the cost of the instant suit.
SO ORDERED.31 cralawred
The appellant assails the decision of the trial court asserting
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING
THE DEFENSE INTERPOSED BY THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING AS
EVIDENCE THE STOLEN ITEMS ALLEGEDLY SEIZED FROM THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT WHICH, AS
THE RECORDS DISCLOSE, WERE PRODUCTS OF AN ILLEGAL SEARCH.32 cralawred
The Court shall delve into and resolve the assignment of errors
jointly, being interrelated.
The appellant asserts that the extrajudicial confession33 is inadmissible in evidence because the signature above his typewritten name on
page 3 thereof is a forgery.
that he was forced by SPO2 Benedicto del Mundo and another policeman to sign a
blank page at the town plaza in the presence of Atty. Wilfredo Paraiso.
According to him, that blank page which he
signed is now the first page of the extrajudicial confession.
Furthermore, there is a patent and utter
dissimilarity between his genuine signature on page 1 of the extrajudicial confession
and his purported signature on page 3 thereof.
The appellant claims that SPO2 Benedicto del Mundo and Atty.
Wilfredo Paraiso are not even in accord as to the precise time when the
appellant signed the said confession. The appellant contends that Barangay
Captain William Magpantay, SPO2 Maximo Gonzales and SPO1 Pedro N. Nacor,
seized the money and articles from
him in the mobile car and from his house without any search warrant therefor,
when he was already arrested by the policemen. As such, the articles are
inadmissible in evidence.
inadmissibility of the extrajudicial confession and the money and articles
seized from him, the prosecutor failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable
doubt for the crime charged.
For its part, the Office of the Solicitor General asserts that the
appellant failed to prove that the disputed signature is a forgery.
Contrary to the appellants claim, the
signatures atop the typewritten name of the appellant on page 3 of his
confession, and on page 1 and 2 thereof, are similar. Furthermore, the warrantless seizure of the money and articles
from the appellant made by the barangay captain and the policemen was
permissible as an incident to the appellants lawful warrantless arrest.
The Courts Ruling
The Court rejects the appellants claim that his signature on
page 3 of his extrajudicial confession is a forgery and that he affixed his
signature on a blank paper, which is now on page 1 of the said confession.
The appellant was required to submit his counter-affidavit during
the preliminary investigation before the MTC of Lumban, Laguna, but he failed
to do so.
Furthermore, in his Comment
on the Formal Offer of Exhibits filed by the prosecution, the appellant did
not claim that he was made to sign a blank paper and that his signature on page
3 of the extrajudicial confession was a forgery. The appellant made this claim for the first time, only when he
testified before the trial court. Forgery cannot be presumed; it must be proved
by clear, positive and convincing evidence. One who alleges forgery has the
burden of proving the same.34 The appellant failed to discharge his burden.
The extrajudicial confession of the appellant was notarized by
Atty. Wilfredo O. Paraiso who certified that he had personally examined the
appellant and that he was satisfied that the latter had voluntarily executed
The notary publics
certification belies the appellants claim that he was forced by the police
officers to affix his signature on page 1 of his confession. Atty. Paraiso is
an officer of the court.
He is presumed
to have regularly performed his duties as such notary public. The presumption
cannot be overcome by the bare and uncorroborated claim of the appellant that
the signature on page 3 of his extrajudicial confession is a forgery.
It is hard to believe that Atty. Paraiso
notarized the confession of the appellant at the town plaza without the
appellant first affixing his signatures, not only on the left margin of pages 1
and 2, but also atop his typewritten name on page 3 thereof.
We also note that the appellants counsel
cross-examined Atty. Paraiso, but failed to cross-examine the latter on the
alleged dissimilarity of the signatures on page 3 of the confession and those
on the left margin of pages 1 and 2 thereof.
Finally, the appellant himself had initialed the corrections of
typographical errors in his confession.35 cralawred
In claiming that the signature atop his typewritten name on page
3 of the confession is a forgery, the appellant relied solely on the alleged
dissimilarity between his signatures.
In Causapin v. Court of Appeals,36 this Court held that an accurate examination to determine forgery should dwell
on both the similarities and dissimilarities of the standard and questioned
Professor Albert S. Osborn,
a noted expert on questioned documents, stated that in some measure, a
forgery will be like the genuine writing, and there is always bound to be some
variation in the different samples of genuine signatures of the same
He emphasized that the
identification of a handwriting, as to its genuineness or lack of genuineness,
or of a continued writing as to whether it was written by a certain writer, is
based upon the fact that handwriting embodies various qualities and
dissimilarities which in combination are sufficiently personal to serve as a
basis of identification. These many attributes and qualities are of varying
degrees of force and evidence of identity, depending upon just what they are
and their nature.37 cralawred
Professor Osborn also points out that one of the principal causes
of errors in determining whether the handwriting is genuine or forged, or in
deciding whether a particular handwriting was or was not written by a certain
writer is the incompetence of the observer who bases his conclusion entirely
upon general appearance, or upon general character of handwriting as a whole;
basing conclusions on forms or designs of letters alone; mistaking general
characteristics of writing or individual characteristics and basing conclusions
thereon; failure to reason correctly regarding the observed characteristics
he sees the evidence but does not know what it means.38 cralawred
He went on to emphasize, thus:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
The process of identification, therefore, must include the
determination of the extent, kind and significance of this resemblance as well
as of the variation.
It then becomes
necessary to determine whether the variation
is due to the operation of a different personality, or is only the
expected and inevitable variation found in the genuine writing of the same
writer. It is also necessary to decide whether the resemblance is the result of
a more or less skillful imitation, or is the habitual and characteristic
resemblance which naturally appears in a genuine writing.
When these two questions are correctly
answered the whole problem of identification is solved.
It must also be kept in mind by one who is to identify handwriting
correctly, that the attributes and qualities of writing are much more than the
mere outline or forms of the letters.
Writing becomes a nearly automatic and an almost unconscious act and has
many physical and psychological qualities outside of the mere forms of letters.
The consideration of a writing by all unskilled observers gives attention only
to designs of letters. If the general designs are correct the writing is considered
genuine, or, on the other hand, if they diverge in any way or any degree, the
writing is thought to be a forgery.
One of the most distinctive qualities of writing is that about it
which, by its execution as shown in its line quality, indicates whether it was
freely and unconsciously written, or whether it was written in a constrained,
slow, and unnatural manner.
writing is not necessarily skillfully written, but is written with a lack of
attention to the act.
unconscious, careless, free writing embodies the significant form habits shown
in the genuine writing, this is conclusive proof of genuineness.
It should, however, not be overlooked that a
forgery by one with more muscular skill than the writer of the writing imitated
may fail by showing a higher degree of skill than the genuine writing.
As has been said, One cannot write better
than he can.
There often is in handwriting many of these inherent evidences of
genuineness, or evidences of lack of genuineness, that can be seen without
comparison with any standard writing whatever.
Carelessness, freedom, and indications of unconsciousness of the
operation of writing, when they embody characteristic forms, are proofs of
genuineness in handwriting.
opposite conditions, undue care, attention to detail, hesitation, indicating
not lack of muscular control but attention to the process, and especially
delicate, unnecessary repairs and overwriting, all point to a lack of
genuineness without comparison with any genuine writing.
A correct, scientific discussion of these
points is necessary in effective testimony and should also form the basis of
argument on the subject by the attorney.
In sum, therefore, the fact of forgery cannot be presumed simply
because there are dissimilarities between the standard and the questioned
The discordance between the testimonies of Atty. Paraiso and that
of SPO2 Benedicto del Mundo as to the exact or precise time when the appellant
signed his extrajudicial confession is of minor and inconsequential
Both agree that the
appellant signed his extrajudicial confession in the morning of June 12, 1998.
The trial court correctly convicted the appellant of robbery with
homicide defined and penalized in Article 294, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal
Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, which reads:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
ART. 294. Robbery with
violence against or intimidation of persons
Penalties. Any person guilty of robbery with the use of violence
against or any person shall suffer:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
1. The penalty of reclusion
perpetua to death, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery,
the crime of homicide shall have been committed, or when the robbery shall have
been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson.
To sustain a conviction of the accused for robbery with homicide,
the prosecution was burdened to prove the essential elements of the crime, viz:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
(a) the taking of personal
property with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; (b) the
property thus taken belongs to another; (c) the taking is characterized by
intent to gain or animus lucrandi and
(d) on the occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, the crime of homicide,
which is therein used in a generic sense, was committed.39 cralawred
The accused must be shown to have the principal purpose of
committing robbery, the homicide being committed either by reason of or on
occasion of the robbery.40 The homicide may precede robbery or may occur thereafter.
What is essential is that there is a nexus,
an intrinsic connection between the robbery and the killing. The latter may be
done prior to or subsequent to the former. However, the intent to commit
robbery must precede the taking of the victims life.41 Furthermore, the constituted crimes of robbery and homicide must be
A homicide is considered as having been committed on the occasion
or by reason of the robbery when the motive of the offender in killing the
victim is to deprive the latter of his property, to eliminate an obstacle to
the crime, to protect his possession of the loot, to eliminate witnesses, to
prevent his being apprehended or to insure his escape from the scene of the
In this case, the prosecution adduced proof beyond reasonable
doubt to establish the guilt of the appellant.
In his extrajudicial confession, the appellant stated that he barged
into the house of the victim to rob her, and that he stabbed the victim when
she was about to shout and because he was drunk. Thus:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
T (27) :
May mga ipakikita ako sa iyo ditong mga
alahas, dalawang relos na pangkamay at pambabae, ang isa (1) ay may tatak na
Rolex at ang isa (1) ay tatak Wittnauer, isang (1) gintong pulseras; isang
(1) gintong singsing na may batong kulay-berde
at isang (1) libreta de bangko o Passbook na kulay-pula, may Numero
164764 sa pangalan ni Aurora Lagrada na Passbook ng Solid Bank (THIS
INVESTIGATOR SHOWING TO THE AFFIANT/SUSPECT ALL ITEMS MENTIONED PLACED ON THE
TOP OF THE INVESTIGATORS TABLE),
masasabi mo dito?
S: Iyan na nga po ang mga
ninakaw ko kina Aurora Lagrada.43 cralawred
The appellant then took the victims money and personal
belongings and fled from the scene of the crime:chanroblesvirtua1awlibrary
T (30) : May ipakikita rin ako
sa iyo ditong pera na halagang Isang Daan at Tatlumpung Piso (P130. 00) ang
numero ng Isang Daan ay PK-125726; ang Numero ng Beinte Pesos ay DS-554554 at
ang Numero ng Sampung Piso ay BQ-936130 (THIS INVESTIGATOR IS SHOWING TO
THE AFFIANT/SUSPECT CASH MONEY WITH THE DENOMINATIONS AND SERIAL NUMBERS STATED
ano ang masasabi mo dito?
S: Iyan na nga po ang perang nakuha ko sa ibabaw ng mesa sa ibaba ng
bahay nina Aurora Lagrada.
Kailan at saan ito nagyari?
S: Mga humigit-kumulang po sa alas 11:20 ng gabi, ika-11 ng Hunyo
1998 sa loob ng bahay nina Aurora Lagrada, sa Gen. Luna St.,
Balimbingan, Lumban, Laguna. Ang pagkakapatay ko po sa kanya ay doon sa ibaba
ng bahay malapit sa kusina at ang mga alahas naman po ay doon ko ninakaw sa
loob ng isang kahong maliit na naroroon naman sa itaas ng bahay ni Aurora
The trial court sentenced the appellant to suffer the death
penalty on its finding that the crime was aggravated by the fact that it was
committed in the victims dwelling
in complete disregard of the victims sex and advanced age of seventy years
old. According to the Office of the Solicitor General, however, the imposable
penalty should be reclusion perpetua,
because the foregoing aggravating circumstances were not alleged in the
The ruling of the trial court is not correct.
First. Robbery with homicide is essentially a felony against
property.45 The aggravating circumstance of disregard of the victims age is applied only
to crimes against persons and honor.46 The bare fact that the victim is a woman does not per se constitute disregard of sex. For this circumstance to be properly considered, the prosecution
must adduce evidence that in the commission of the crime, the accused had
particularly intended to insult or commit disrespect to the sex of the victim.47 In this case, the appellant killed the
victim because the latter started to shout. There was no intent to insult nor
commit disrespect to the victim on account of the latters sex.
Second. The fact that the crime was committed in the victims
dwelling, without provocation on the part of the latter, is aggravating in
robbery with homicide.48 However, such circumstance was not alleged in the Information as mandated by
Section 8, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.49 Although the crime was committed before the effectivity of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure, the said rule should be applied retroactively as it is
favorable to the appellant.50 cralawred
The appellant failed to prove that any mitigating circumstance
attended the commission of the crime.
Although he claimed that he was drunk when he gained entry into the
victims house, killed her and divested her of her properties, the appellant
failed to prove that his intoxication was not habitual or subsequent to the
plan to commit the felony charged.
There being no modifying circumstance to the crime, the appellant
should be sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua, conformably to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code.
The trial court was correct in not awarding moral damages to the
heirs of the victim.
failed to present any of them to testify on the factual basis for such
However, the heirs are
entitled to exemplary damages of
P25,000. 00,51 in accordance with current jurisprudence.
IN LIGHT OF ALL THE
FOREGOING, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Sta. Cruz, Laguna,
Branch 25, finding appellant
Antonio Reyes y Magano guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide under Article 294, paragraph 1 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, is AFFIRMED with
MODIFICATION in that the appellant is sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetuaand is ordered to pay
P25,000. 00 to the
heirs of the victim, as exemplary damages.
C.J., Puno, Panganiban, Quisumbing,
Ynares-Santiago Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona,
Carpio-Morales, Azcuna, and TINGA, JJ., concur.
Vitug, J., on official leave.
Penned by Judge Fernando M. Paclibon, Jr.
The prosecution presented Norma Quetulio, Atty. Wilfredo G. Paraiso, SPO2
Benedicto del Mundo, SPO2 Maximo Gonzales, SPO1 Pedro Nacor, Jr.,
M. delos Reyes, as witnesses.
TSN, 21 January 1999, pp. 4-5
Exhibits D, D-1 to D-5.
TSN, 21 January 1999, pp. 6-7.
TSN, 22 September 1999, p. 7.
TSN, 17 December 1998, p. 4.
TSN, 25 November 1998, p. 4.
Exhibit F, Records, p. 14.
TSN, 15 April 1999, p. 7.
Osborn, Problem of Proof, 6th
40 People v. Mendoza
, 284 SCRA 705
41 People v. Ponciano
, 204 SCRA 627
42 People v. Nang
47 People v. Braa
, 30 SCRA 307 (1969).
SEC. 8. Designation of the offense
The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense given
by the statute, aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and
specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances.If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be
made to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it.
50 People v. Escote, supra.
Back to Home | Back to Main