Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
criminal plan. On the other hand, Escober contends that his act of opening the gate
upon seeing Abuyen was just a friendly gesture which is common in treating a friend
and that his act of chasing the perpetrators indicates that he is not a co- conspirator
in the crime committed.
VI. Issues
The issue here is whether or not there exists a conspiracy among the
accused-appellants in committing the crime of robbery with homicide. Is there proof
beyond reasonable doubt that Escober is a co-conspirator in the case at bar?
VII. Holdings and Findings
The Supreme Court held that the act of opening a gate upon hearing a knock
is by itself an innocent gesture. The act of opening the gate by Escober at the knock
of the Abuyen would not constitute sufficient and convincing proof that Escober had
prior knowledge of the crime. The Court also held that the theory ofgun firing
incident as a mere ritual in avoidance of suspicion is holding waters. To allow
Escober to be shot by a gun is too risky as a ritual for he might get killed. Escobers
utterance that he was not hit does not prove either that he was a co-conspirator. It
was but natural that he would want to inform and assure his superior who is
presumed to be concerned with his safety and well- being.
In the case of Punzalan, the Court held that he knew of the plan to commit
the crime and that it is incredible that his companions would fetch him on the
pretext of drinking spree and just bring him along to the scene of the crime, thereby
risking another eyewitness to the perpetration thereof.
The Court through Justin Fernan established the fact whenever a homicide
has been committed as a consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those
who took part as principals in the commission of the robbery are also guilty as
principals in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide although they did
not actually take part in the homicide unless it clearly appeared that they
endeavored to prevent homicide.
VIII. Ratio Decidendi
The Court anchored its decision on the principle of justice and fairness. It held
that the fact that the accused was at the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission is not, by itself, sufficient to establish his criminal liability. To hold the
accused guilty as co-principal in the crime charged, the existence of conspiracy
between the accused and the actual killers, must be shown, and the same degree of
proof required for establishing the crime is required to support a finding of the
presence of the conspiracy, i.e., it must be shown to exist as clearly and
convincingly as the commission of the crime itself. Convictions can never rest on
mere suspicions, however, grave and serious.
IX. Disposition
The decision dated January 10, 1984 in Criminal Case No. Q-22896 of the
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City was set aside. Accused-appellant Juan Escober
was acquitted of the crime of Robbery with Homicide and his immediate release
from confinement is ordered, unless detained for some other crimes. Accusedappellant Macario Punzalan, Jr.was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt as
principal in the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide and was sentenced to
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of the victims in
the amount of P60,000,00.