People v. Latam
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On February 8, 1998, at around 6:45 p.m., seven armed individuals, identified as appellants Gaga Latam, Saligo Kuyan, Kamison Akoy, along with Ngano Sugan, Nga Ben Latam, alias Francing, and Cosme Latam, entered the residence of Fortunato Delos Reyes. Five entered the house while two acted as lookouts. Inside, the armed men declared a holdup, ordered the occupants (Fortunato, his wife Thelma, and son Nestor) to the floor, and demanded money and valuables. They took ₱10,000.00 in cash, personal belongings worth ₱5,000.00, and an air gun valued at ₱2,800.00. Subsequently, Ngano brought Nestor outside and shot him. Reggie Delos Reyes, another son, arrived upon hearing the gunshot and was prevented from entering by Kamison (with a knife) and Cosme (with a gun). Nestor was rushed to the hospital but died due to multiple gunshot wounds. Procedural History: The appellants and their companions were charged with robbery with homicide before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Appellants Gaga Latam, Saligo Kuyan, and Kamison Akoy pleaded not guilty. Ngano Sugan, Nga Ben Latam, and alias Francing remained at large. Cosme Latam died while under detention. The RTC found the appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide committed by a band and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, ordering them to pay civil indemnity, burial expenses, and the value of stolen items. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision in toto, holding that the positive identification by the victims and corroboration from Reggie Delos Reyes established the appellants' guilt, and disregarding their defenses of denial and alibi. The Petition: The appellants appealed the CA decision to the Supreme Court.
Issue(s)
Whether the appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of robbery with homicide. Whether the appellants are liable for the killing of Nestor Delos Reyes despite not being the one who fired the fatal shots. Whether the defense of denial and alibi are sufficient to acquit the appellants. Whether the crime committed was robbery with homicide committed by a band; and the award of damages.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, finding the appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide, but modified the awarded indemnities. The penalty imposed was reclusion perpetua.
Ratio Decidendi
On the guilt for robbery with homicide: The Court affirmed the conviction for robbery with homicide, reiterating that this special complex crime exists when a homicide is committed either by reason or on occasion of the robbery. The prosecution must prove the taking of personal property with intent to gain, through violence or intimidation, and that the homicide occurred on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court found that the appellants' overriding intention was to rob Fortunato's house, as evidenced by their armed entry, demand for valuables, and the actual taking of cash and belongings. The killing of Nestor was found to be incidental to the robbery. On liability for the killing: The Court held that all principals in the robbery are liable for robbery with homicide, even if they did not directly participate in the killing, provided the homicide was committed by reason of or on the occasion of the robbery and they did not seek to prevent it. In this case, conspiracy was established by the concerted actions of the appellants and their companions: five entered the house to rob, two acted as lookouts, one shot Nestor, and the lookouts prevented Reggie from intervening. The evidence did not show any attempt by the appellants to avert Nestor's killing. Therefore, under the principle that the act of one conspirator is the act of all, they are all liable for the homicide committed during the robbery. On the defenses of denial and alibi: The Court found no merit in the appellants' defenses of denial and alibi. Denial is a weak and self-serving defense that cannot overcome positive and straightforward identification by credible witnesses. Alibi is also viewed with suspicion and requires proof that the accused was so far away from the crime scene that it was physically impossible for them to be present. The appellants failed to provide such convincing evidence, and their testimonies were contradicted by the positive identification made by Fortunato, Thelma, and Reggie. On the denomination of the crime and damages: The Court clarified that there is no specific crime of "robbery with homicide committed by a band." If robbery with homicide is committed by a band, the offense remains robbery with homicide under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code, and the "band" is appreciated as an ordinary aggravating circumstance. The penalty for robbery with homicide is reclusion perpetua to death. With the aggravating circumstance of commission by a band, the penalty would have been death, but due to Republic Act No. 9346, the death penalty is prohibited, thus the imposition of reclusion perpetua was correct. The Court awarded ₱75,000.00 as moral damages, ₱25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of lesser proven burial expenses, and ₱30,000.00 as exemplary damages due to the presence of an aggravating circumstance, conforming to recent jurisprudence.
Main Doctrine
In robbery with homicide, all conspirators are liable for the crime, even if only one committed the killing, provided the killing was incidental to the robbery and they did not seek to prevent it. The presence of the aggravating circumstance of commission by a band elevates the penalty, but the prohibition against the death penalty means reclusion perpetua is imposed.