People v. Nunag
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Evangeline Nunag, Tirso delas Armas, and Arnel Zafra were charged with Robbery with Homicide and Less Serious Physical Injuries. The information alleged that on February 22, 1988, in Sta. Maria, Bulacan, the accused conspired to rob Agueda Santos and Epifania Santos of P3,063.35. During the robbery, they attacked Agueda Santos with a driftwood and a knife, causing her death, and inflicted less serious physical injuries on Epifania Santos. Procedural History: Nunag and delas Armas pleaded not guilty. Zafra remained at large. Delas Armas later pleaded guilty and was convicted of robbery with homicide and less serious physical injuries, with sentence suspended due to his minority. Nunag filed a motion to subpoena delas Armas as a defense witness, which was granted. The prosecution presented four witnesses: Leonides Mateo (laundrywoman), Pat. Godofredo Glorioso (police officer), Carlos Santos (victim's husband), and Dr. Benito Caballero (autopsy surgeon). The defense presented Nunag and delas Armas. The trial court found Nunag guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged and sentenced her to reclusion perpetua, ordering her to jointly and solidarily indemnify the heirs of Agueda Santos. The case against Zafra was archived. The Petition: Nunag appealed, contending that the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimonies of delas Armas and Mateo, in not giving weight to her claim of innocence, and in finding that conspiracy attended the commission of the crime.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimonies of Tirso delas Armas and Leonides Mateo, and in not giving weight to the appellant's claim of innocence. Whether conspiracy attended the commission of the crime. Whether the crime should be classified as robbery with homicide and less serious physical injuries. Whether the damages awarded were proper.
Ruling
The appealed decision is AFFIRMED but MODIFIED. The appellant is found guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. The award for compensatory damages for the victim's death is increased from P30,000.00 to P50,000.00.
Ratio Decidendi
On the credibility of testimonies and appellant's claim of innocence: The Court found no substance to the charge that Tirso delas Armas' testimony was fabricated. Delas Armas was presented as a defense witness at Nunag's insistence, and his testimony, though not what the appellant expected, did not indicate fabrication by the prosecution. The Court noted that both delas Armas' and Mateo's testimonies were consistent regarding Nunag's position astride the victim, likened to a jockey on a horse. Furthermore, the appellant's claim of innocence was contradicted by evidence. Patrolman Glorioso testified that he saw the appellant running away from the scene, and her explanation for fleeing towards a rice field instead of seeking help from the nearby hospital or crowd was deemed hard to believe. Her act of slashing her wrist was interpreted as an act of desperation, fear, and remorse. The recovery of P2,317.00 from a jacket tied to her body, along with her personal identification cards and a photograph, belied her claim that the jacket belonged to Tirso delas Armas and that she was unaware of the money inside. The Court found her explanation for the presence of her personal documents in Tirso's jacket to be implausible. On the existence of conspiracy: The Court deduced that conspiracy attended the commission of the crime from the malefactors' concerted acts, which demonstrated their criminal design and unity of purpose. They pretended to be job seekers to gain entry, executed their acts after the victim's husband left, cut the telephone line, and acted in concert. Nunag straddled the victim to prevent her from fighting back or seeking help, while delas Armas neutralized the laundrywoman by threatening her with a knife and locking her in the kitchen. The three accused took money and coins belonging to the victims. The Court reiterated the principle that in conspiracy to commit robbery with homicide, all participants are deemed principals in the special complex crime, even if they did not directly participate in the homicide, unless they endeavored to prevent it. On the classification of the crime: The Court disagreed with the trial court's designation of the crime as robbery with homicide and less serious physical injuries. It clarified that the alleged victim, Epifania Santos, did not suffer less serious physical injuries, as her bloodied state was attributed to the blood of her mother, Agueda Santos, spilling onto her dress. More importantly, the Court stated that there is no special complex crime of robbery with homicide and less serious physical injuries. The offense is denominated as robbery with homicide, and any other injuries committed during the robbery serve only as generic aggravating circumstances, which can be offset by mitigating circumstances. Therefore, the crime should be classified solely as robbery with homicide. On the damages: The Court affirmed the trial court's finding of guilt for robbery with homicide. However, it modified the award for compensatory damages, increasing the indemnity for the victim's death from P30,000.00 to P50,000.00, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence at the time.
Main Doctrine
In conspiracy to commit robbery with homicide, all participants are liable as principals for the special complex crime, even if they did not directly participate in the killing, unless they endeavored to prevent it. The crime is denominated as robbery with homicide regardless of the number of homicides or injuries committed, with other injuries serving as generic aggravating circumstances.