People v. Magno
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The ASUNCION brothers, Andres, Dominador, and Quirino, were on their way home after Dominador received P2,000.00 to buy corn. They stopped by a house for a benefit dance. Dominador entrusted the box containing the money and other items to the host, Boy Lineses. During the dance, a group led by Angel Manalo arrived. A heated bidding for a "social box" led to a near altercation between Manalo and the Asuncion brothers, which was averted when Manalo left. Later, as the Asuncion brothers were heading home, the Manalo group ambushed them near Balisong Creek. The box was snatched, Andres Asuncion was fatally stabbed by Angel Manalo, and Quirino and Dominador Asuncion were also attacked and injured. Rolando Tolentino, a member of the Manalo group, testified about the pre-arranged plan to rob the Asuncion brothers, including signals and division of the group. Quirino Asuncion corroborated the clapping signals and the subsequent assault. Procedural History: The accused were indicted for Robbery with Homicide. The trial court sentenced Perlito Magno, Manuel Ronduen, Vicente Calingao, and Antonio Calingao to reclusion perpetua. Raul Quimoyog and Bonifacio Gongora, Jr. were sentenced to an indeterminate penalty, with their sentence suspended due to minority under PD 603. Paulino Asuncion and Romualdo Sagun were acquitted. Angel Manalo remained at large. The Petition: The defendants-appellants (Perlito Magno, Manuel Ronduen, Vicente Calingao, Antonio Calingao, Raul Quimoyog, and Bonifacio Gongora, Jr.) appealed their conviction.
Issue(s)
Whether conspiracy was sufficiently proven. Whether the crime of Robbery was committed. Whether the killing of Andres Asuncion arose out of or on the occasion of the robbery. Whether the penalty imposed on the minor accused was proper.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court, with modifications to the indemnity awarded. The conviction of Perlito Magno, Manuel Ronduen, Vicente Calingao, and Antonio Calingao to reclusion perpetua was upheld. The indeterminate penalty for Raul Quimoyog and Bonifacio Gongora, Jr. was affirmed, and their sentence suspension under PD 603 was maintained. The acquittal of Paulino Asuncion and Romualdo Sagun was also affirmed. The indemnity to the heirs of Andres Asuncion was increased to P30,000.00.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of conspiracy: The Court held that conspiracy was sufficiently proven. It is enough that the participants had the same purpose and were united in its execution, which can be inferred from attendant circumstances and manifested by united and concerted action. The testimony of Rolando Tolentino, an admitted member of the Manalo group, provided direct evidence of the conspiracy. His declarations were deemed sufficient to prove the conspiracy among the convicted accused, as no motive was attributed to him for falsely implicating his friends. The corroboration from Dominador and Quirino Asuncion regarding the waylaying and clapping signals further strengthened the finding of conspiracy. Applying the principle that the act of one is the act of all in conspiracy, the Court found all conspirators liable for the acts committed. On the issue of Robbery: The Court found that the crime of Robbery was sufficiently proven. Evidence showed that Angel Manalo and Bonifacio Gongora, Jr. were aware of the P2,000.00 in the Nescafe box. Dominador Asuncion had informed Manalo that he had money for corn, which was inside the box entrusted to Boy Lineses. Gongora was present when Dominador confided this to Manalo. Manalo had even asked for an advance, indicating his knowledge of the money. The defense's contention that "nobody knows" about the money was clarified as referring to the receipt of the money from Escanilla, not the subsequent disclosure to Manalo. Therefore, the snatching of the box containing the cash, sugar, and coffee constituted robbery. On whether the killing arose out of or on the occasion of the robbery: The Court held that the fatal stabbing of Andres Asuncion arose out of or on the occasion of the robbery. The evidence indicated that on the same occasion that the Nescafe box was snatched from Dominador Asuncion, his brother Andres was fatally stabbed by Angel Manalo. The testimony of accused Raul Quimoyog himself confirmed that Manalo stabbed Andres Asuncion with a hunting knife. The Court emphasized that it matters not that the robbery victim was different from the homicide victim, citing People vs. Disimban. On the penalty for minor accused: The Court affirmed the indeterminate penalty imposed on Raul Quimoyog and Bonifacio Gongora, Jr. and the suspension of their sentence. It noted that they were 18 years old at the time. The Court applied Presidential Decree No. 603 (Child and Youth Welfare Code), which was more favorable to the accused, allowing for the suspension of their sentence and commitment to the Department of Social Welfare until they reached the age of 21 or a shorter period deemed proper by the Court. This application of PD 603 was given retroactive effect as it was more favorable to the accused, notwithstanding the general rule of prospective application of criminal laws.
Main Doctrine
Conspiracy is proven by the unity of purpose and concerted action, and the act of one is the act of all. The crime of Robbery with Homicide is sufficiently proven when the fatal stabbing arose out of or on the occasion of the robbery, even if the robbery victim is different from the homicide victim. The suspension of sentence for minors convicted of crimes is permissible under PD 603 if it is more favorable to the accused.