People v. Palema
G.R. No. 228000
July 10, 2019
FACTS:
The
evidence for the prosecution revealed that at around 11:00 p.m. on November 10,
2007, Enicasio Depante (Enicasio), his common-law spouse, his son Erickson
Depante (Erickson), and his stepdaughter Jamie Rose Baya (Jamie) were sitting
on the benches at the Calamba Town Plaza. That was when three (3) men, who were
later identified as Palema, Palmea, and Manzanero, approached Enicasio. Suddenly,
Palmea threw a punch at Enicasio in an attempt to grab his phone. Palema
simultaneously pulled out a knife and tried to stab him in the abdomen, but was
warded off by Jamie, making him drop his knife. Once he retrieved his knife,
Palema stabbed Enicasio on the right thigh, causing him to fall on the ground.
Then, Grengia and Saldua arrived at the scene and joined in beating Enicasio. Seated
on the bench near Enicasio, Erickson stood and tried to help his father, but
Ladra stopped him. When he resisted, Ladra attempted to stab him, but he was
able to evade the attack and immediately look for a weapon. Upon reaching his
father, however, he saw that Enicasio had already collapsed from the stab
wounds. Erickson brought his father to the Calamba Medical Center, but he later
died from blood loss.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not accused is guilty of robbery with homicide.
HELD:
Yes.
Robbery with homicide is a special complex crime punished under Article 294 of
the Revised Penal Code. It is perpetrated when, by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, homicide is committed.45 Article 294(1) states: Article 294. Robbery
with Violence Against or Intimidation of Persons — Penalties. — Any person
guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any
person shall suffer: 1. The penalty of reclusión perpetua to death, when by
reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide shall have been
committed. To hold a person liable for this crime, the prosecution must
establish the following elements with proof beyond reasonable doubt:(1) the taking of personal property with
violence or intimidation against persons; (2) the property taken belongs to
another; (3) the taking was done with animo lucrandi; and (4) on the occasion
of the robbery or by reason thereof, homicide was committed. In convicting
accused-appellants, the Regional Trial Court gave credence to the testimonies
of the prosecution witnesses, who recounted that the accused men were the ones
who had simultaneously assaulted Enicasio. Based on their testimonies,
Manzanero and accused-appellants Palema and Palmea all approached Enicasio and
took his cellphone. When Enicasio tried to fight back, Palema stabbed him,
causing him to fall. Immediately after, the other accused joined the fray and
beat Enicasio. It is clear that accused-appellants' primary objective was to
rob Enicasio.1avvphi1 But, by reason or on the occasion of the robbery,
Enicasio was stabbed and died as a result. Finally, while accused-appellants
argued that the Regional Trial Court erred in giving weight to the prosecution
witnesses' testimonies, they failed to present evidence to the contrary.
Settled is the rule that "the
matter of assigning values to declarations on the witness stand is best and
most competently performed by the trial court judge," who has "the
unmatched opportunity to observe the witnesses and to assess their credibility
by the various indicia available but not reflected on the record."As such,
this Court gives great weight and respect to the judge's assessment of the witnesses'
credibility.
