January 2009 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2009 > January 2009 Resolutions >
[G.R. No. 185451 : January 19, 2009] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. CIC ADRIANO PEÑOL :
[G.R. No. 185451 : January 19, 2009]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. CIC ADRIANO PEÑOL
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 19 January 2009:
G.R. No. 185451 (People of the Philippines v. CIC Adriano Pe�ol). � Petitioner was among those charged with and separately tried of the crime of Robbery in Band. Despite positive identification by the prosecution's witnesses, petitioner denied involvement in the said crime, interposing the defenses of denial and alibi. The Regional Trial Court[1] (RTC) found the prosecution evidence sufficient to establish all the essential elements of the crime charged as well as the qualifying circumstance. As positive assertions deserve more credence and entitled to greater evidentiary weight, petitioner was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day to six (6) years, one (1) month and ten (10) days, as well as to the accessory penalties as specified under law.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed with modification the RTC's decision.[2] It held that the prosecution evidence showed that only two of the five robbers were armed, hence, the offense cannot be robbery in band but only simple robbery as the element of "more than three armed malefactors" required under Article 296 of the Revised Penal Code to qualify robbery to robbery in band is lacking. The penalty was thus modified to an indeterminate sentence of four (4) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor as minimum, to six (6) years, one (1) month and eleven (11) days of prision mayor as maximum. Petitioner was denied reconsideration.
Petitioner now comes to us for redress via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Considering however the allegations, issues and arguments adduced, this Court resolves to DENY the instant petition for failure to sufficiently show reversible error in the assailed decision to warrant the exercise of this Court's discretionary appellate jurisdiction.
WHEREFORE, the Court ADOPTS the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Decision dated 27 August 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 28659, finding petitioner CIC Adriano Pe�ol guilty beyond reasonable doubt of simple robbery, and AFFIRMS said Decision.
G.R. No. 185451 (People of the Philippines v. CIC Adriano Pe�ol). � Petitioner was among those charged with and separately tried of the crime of Robbery in Band. Despite positive identification by the prosecution's witnesses, petitioner denied involvement in the said crime, interposing the defenses of denial and alibi. The Regional Trial Court[1] (RTC) found the prosecution evidence sufficient to establish all the essential elements of the crime charged as well as the qualifying circumstance. As positive assertions deserve more credence and entitled to greater evidentiary weight, petitioner was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day to six (6) years, one (1) month and ten (10) days, as well as to the accessory penalties as specified under law.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed with modification the RTC's decision.[2] It held that the prosecution evidence showed that only two of the five robbers were armed, hence, the offense cannot be robbery in band but only simple robbery as the element of "more than three armed malefactors" required under Article 296 of the Revised Penal Code to qualify robbery to robbery in band is lacking. The penalty was thus modified to an indeterminate sentence of four (4) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor as minimum, to six (6) years, one (1) month and eleven (11) days of prision mayor as maximum. Petitioner was denied reconsideration.
Petitioner now comes to us for redress via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Considering however the allegations, issues and arguments adduced, this Court resolves to DENY the instant petition for failure to sufficiently show reversible error in the assailed decision to warrant the exercise of this Court's discretionary appellate jurisdiction.
WHEREFORE, the Court ADOPTS the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Decision dated 27 August 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 28659, finding petitioner CIC Adriano Pe�ol guilty beyond reasonable doubt of simple robbery, and AFFIRMS said Decision.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd. ) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
(Sgd. ) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] In a decision dated 24 February 2003 penned by Judge Erasto D. Salcedo of the Regional Trial Court of Tagura City, Branch 2 in Criminal Case No. Q-99-87470.
[2] In a decision promulgated on 27 August 2008 in CA-G.R- CR No. 28659 penned by Associate Justice Ruben C. Ayson and concurred in by Associate Justices Rodrigo F. Lim, Jr. and Michael P. Elbinias.
