G.R. No. L-8476; February 28, 1958
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ABUNDIO ROMAGOSA alias DAVID, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Appellant Abundio Romagosa was accused in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur of the complex crime of rebellion with murders, robberies, and kidnappings under an information containing three counts. These counts were identical to the last three counts charged in a related case, People vs. Federico Geronimo. The information alleged that Romagosa, as a member or affiliate of the Communist Party of the Philippines and the Hukbong Mapagpalaya Ng Bayan (HMB), conspired to commit rebellion by rising publicly and taking arms against the government. It specified that as a necessary means to commit rebellion and in furtherance thereof, the HMB committed acts including: (1) the 1951-1952 capture and killing of Police Sergeant Nemesio Palo in Pasacao, Camarines Sur; (2) the January 31, 1953 ambush of an Army Patrol in Del Gallego, Camarines Sur, resulting in serious wounds; and (3) the February 1954 killing of barrio lieutenant Policarpio Tipay in San Fernando, Camarines Sur, by a group including Romagosa and Commander Oscar. Upon arraignment, Romagosa pleaded guilty. The prosecution recommended life imprisonment, while the defense argued the proper penalty was only prision mayor for simple rebellion, contending that the murders, robberies, and kidnappings were absorbed as natural consequences of rebellion. The lower court convicted Romagosa of the complex crime of rebellion with murders, robberies, and kidnappings and, considering his plea of guilty as a mitigating circumstance, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, a fine, indemnities, and costs. Romagosa appealed.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the appellant can be convicted of the complex crime of rebellion with murders, robberies, and kidnappings under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, or only of simple rebellion, with the related question of whether his plea of guilty admits to the commission of separate, independent offenses alleged within the information.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the lower court’s decision. Consistent with its precedent in People vs. Hernandez and People vs. Geronimo, the Court held that where murders, robberies, and kidnappings are committed as a means to or in furtherance of the rebellion, they are absorbed by and form part of the crime of rebellion. Therefore, the lower court erred in convicting Romagosa of a complex crime. The Court further ruled, following the majority view in the Geronimo case, that the appellant’s plea of guilty required examination of the specific counts. The first count (killing of Nemesio Palo) did not charge appellant’s participation and was not considered. The second count (ambush of an Army Patrol) alleged an essential act of rebellion and was absorbed by that crime. The third count (killing of Policarpio Tipay) charged murder that did not appear to be related to the rebellion and thus constituted an independent offense. Consequently, by his plea of guilty, appellant admitted to both simple rebellion and the separate crime of murder. The Court convicted appellant of two separate offenses: simple rebellion and murder. Considering the mitigating circumstance of his plea of guilty, the Court sentenced him for rebellion to 8 years of prision mayor and a fine of P10,000, and for murder to an indeterminate sentence of 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum to 18 years of reclusion temporal as maximum, plus an indemnity to the heirs of Policarpio Tipay. A dissenting opinion argued that the killing of Tipay, as alleged in the information to have been done “in furtherance” of the rebellion, should be absorbed and that convicting for a separate murder based on the plea violated due process.