4. People v.

Lagmay October 29, 1992 person not responsible for its commission, any of the physical injuries covered by
subdivisions 3 and 4 of Art. 263.
J. GUTIERREZ, JR.
The offense was committed under at least 2 of the circumstances mentioned in
FACTS: A295. The robbery was consummated by attacking a moving motor vehicle such
Lagmay, Padullana and Baetiong rode a jeep at Blumentritt Street, Manila. When that the passengers thereof were taken by surprise. It was likewise committed
the jeep was near 11th Avenue, A. Bonifacio Street, Quezon City, they brought along a street on the regular route taken by the jeep with use of a firearm.
out an unlicensed firearm and bladed weapons, declared a hold-up and
threatened passengers with death if they resisted/cried for help. Hence, the offenders shall be punished by the maximum period of the
prescribed penalty in S4, A294, or RT in its medium period.
They were able to obtain money and various personal properties. When a
passenger, Patrolman Pedrano resisted, Baetiong stabbed him in the chest while Other arguments:
Lagmay shot him on the right and left thighs. The accused were charged with Accused: There is no conspiracy as there was no proof that all 3 of them knew
Robbery and Frustrated Homicide. each other and that there was no proof of a pre-conceived agreement to commit
the robbery.
RTC: Guilty of Robbery with Frustrated Homicide under S2, A294 RPC. SC: Conspiracy which determines criminal culpability need not entail a close
personal association or at least an acquaintance between or among the
WON the crime committed was robbery with frustrated homicide. participants. Evidence of a previous agreement to commit a crime is not
Held: NO essential to establish conspiracy. It is established by evidence of unity of
The RTC erred in designating the crime as robbery with frustrated homicide, in purpose at the time of the commission of the offense and unity in its execution.
applying S2, A294. There is no crime as robbery with frustrated homicide. What is important is that in the performance of the specific acts necessary to
The said provision penalizes robbery that is accompanied by rape or intentional achieve their goal, there was such closeness and coordination that would
mutilation, or on the occasion of or by reason of which any of the physical indicate a common purpose or design. Here, conspiracy was established by
injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted. It is conclusive evidence based on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.
not applicable here as the records do not show any of such circumstances to be
present. Accused: The extrajudicial confessions are inadmissible as they were tortured to
obtain it.
As the seriousness of the injuries suffered by Patrolman Pedrano was proven, SC: As the admissions were taken w/o assistance of counsel, it is inadmissible.
the accused shall be held liable under S4, A294 RPC which states: However these were not necessary for a conviction as they were positively
Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. Penalties Any identified by witnesses.
person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any person
shall suffer: DECISION: RTC decision AFFIRMED, with the modification that the accused-
xxx xxx xxx appellants are held guilty of the offense of robbery defined in S4, A294, and the
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its circumstances mentioned in Article 295 were present.
medium period, if the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the
robbery shall have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the
crime, or when in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any