GR L 28812; (July, 1974) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-28812, July 31, 1974
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff, vs. Silverio Luna, defendant.
FACTS
On the evening of October 15, 1960, in Barrio Ilayang Pulo, Quezon, two masked men entered the house of Eduardo Adal. They hogtied the family, demanded money, and stole cash, a rifle, a radio, and other items. The mask of the shorter robber fell, revealing him as Silverio Luna. After the robbery, Luna, acting on instructions from Pablo Adal (Eduardo’s son from a first marriage), forced Eduardo to accompany him to the house of Alfredo Adal, Eduardo’s son with his common-law wife. There, Luna similarly robbed and assaulted Alfredo. Luna, with his companion Pedro, then took Eduardo, Alfredo, and a motorboat owner, Venancio de Leon, out to sea. Despite pleas for mercy, Luna stabbed Alfredo and threw both him and Eduardo overboard. Alfredo died, but Eduardo miraculously survived by untying himself and swimming to shore.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted Silverio Luna of the crime of robbery in band with homicide and properly imposed the death penalty.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty. The legal logic is anchored on the elements of robbery with homicide under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code, which requires that a homicide be committed by reason or on the occasion of a robbery. The Court found the prosecution evidence, primarily the credible and consistent testimonies of the surviving victim Eduardo Adal and other witnesses, conclusively established that Luna committed the robbery and, on the same occasion and by reason thereof, killed Alfredo Adal. His defense of alibi was correctly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated.
The penalty for robbery with homicide is reclusion perpetua to death. The Court identified three aggravating circumstances attending the commission of the crime: (1) band, as two armed persons participated; (2) evident premeditation, demonstrated by the planned nature of the crimes in concert with Pablo Adal; and (3) cruelty, shown by the manner of Alfredo’s killing and the jettisoning of the victims. With these aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstance to offset them, the imposition of the supreme penalty of death was legally mandated under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court modified the judgment only by increasing the civil indemnity to the heirs of Alfredo Adal from P6,000 to P12,000.