Scribd
Upload
53 views

Upreme Ourt: Epuhlic of Tbe Bilippines

The Supreme Court of the Philippines issued a resolution dismissing the appeal of Rolando Cariquez y Camba and Reynaldo Cariquez y Camba, finding them guilty of robbery with homicide. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Court, which found that the elements of robbery with homicide were met, and that the positive identification of the appellants was valid. The Court upheld the civil liabilities imposed but modified the actual damages award.

Uploaded by

Earl Tabasuares
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
53 views

Upreme Ourt: Epuhlic of Tbe Bilippines

The Supreme Court of the Philippines issued a resolution dismissing the appeal of Rolando Cariquez y Camba and Reynaldo Cariquez y Camba, finding them guilty of robbery with homicide. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Court, which found that the elements of robbery with homicide were met, and that the positive identification of the appellants was valid. The Court upheld the civil liabilities imposed but modified the actual damages award.

Uploaded by

Earl Tabasuares
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

~epuhlic of tbe ~bilippines

~upreme ~ourt
;ffflantla

FIRST DIVISION

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a


Resolution dated December 7, 2021 which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 251011 (People of the Philippines, plaintiff-


appellee v. Rolando Cariquez y Camba and Reynaldo Cariquez y
Camba, accused-appellants).

After a careful review of the records, the Court resolves to


DISMISS the appeal. The January 31, 2019 Decision I of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09999, which affirmed with
modification the September 29, 2017 Decision2 of the Regional Trial
Court of Makati City, Branch 133 {RTC) in Criminal Case No. R-
!vfKT-16-00322-CR, finding Rolando Cariquez y Camba (Rolando)
and Reynaldo Cariquez y Camba (Reynaldo; collectively, accused-
appellants) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex
crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294, paragraph (1) of
the Revised Penal Code (RPC), is AFFIRMED.

To hold a person liable for the special complex crime of


robbery with homicide under Art. 294, par. (1) of the RPC, 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. 3 In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of
the malefactor is to commit robbery, with homicide perpetrated on the

- over - four (4) pages...


105-A

1 Rollo, pp. 3-19; penned by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez (now a Member of the Court), with
Associate Justices Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles and Perpetua T. Atal-Pafio, concurring.
2
CA rollo, pp. 74-86; penned by Presiding Judge Elpidio R. Calis.
3
People v. Palema, G.R. No. 228000, July 10, 2019.
RESOLUTION 2 G.R. No. 251011
December 7, 2021

occasion or by reason of the robbery. The intent to commit robbery


must precede the taking of human life. The homicide may take place
before, during or after the robbery. 4

In this case, the prosecution was able to establish beyond


reasonable doubt the presence of the above-mentioned elements.
Personal properties belonging to the water station owner were taken
with violence. The accused-appellants' overt acts showed their intent
to gain, especially when they rushed to leave as soon as they took the
personal properties. Lastly, death occurred on the occasion of or by
reason of the robbery when Reynaldo shot Erner Bafias (Emer) after
the taking of the properties.

As regards the positive identification of accused-appellants, the


same was properly made through the valid out-of-court identification,
as well as in open court. Contrary to accused-appellants' claim, the
RTC and the CA were correct in ruling against any impermissible
suggestion in the identification of Reynaldo because Elmer Bafias5
(Elmer) had already described Reynaldo in his sworn statements prior
to the out-of-court identification in the hospital. The defense did not
offer any concrete evidence to show that Elmer had, indeed, no
opportunity to witness and see the faces of accused-appellants at the
time of the crime. The alleged inconsistent statement relating to
accused-appellants' height was immaterial and did not affect the
credibility of Elmer as a witness. Thus, guided by the totality of
circumstances test, Elmer's out-of-court identification of Reynaldo
was admissible, reliable, and had probative value.

Moreover, the group photo from Facebook which was the


defense's lone documentary proof in its attempt to establish that
Rolando was not involved in the robbery cannot be given weight
considering that said photo did not bear any date and time. 6 The
defense also failed to show that it was physically impossible for
Rolando to be present at the crime scene.

In sum, accused-appellants' defenses of denial and alibi will not


prevail over the categorical, straightforward, and positive
identification by the prosecution witness. Denial is an inherently weak
defense and is generally viewed upon with disfavor because it is
easily concocted but difficult to disprove. For an alibi to prosper, it

- over -
105-A

4
People v. De Jesus, 473 Phil. 405, 427 (2004).
5
Emer's twin brother.
6
CA rollo, p . 83.
RESOLUTION 3 G.R. No. 251011
December 7, 2021

must be proved that the accused was in another place during the
commission of the crime, rendering it physically impossible for the
accused to be at the scene of the crime. Further, an alibi must be
corroborated by disinterested witnesses. 7

Finally, the penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the RTC


and sustained by the CA, as well as the awards of civil indemnity and
moral damages, was correct. The additional award of exemplary
damages was likewise proper. Further, the CA correctly reduced the
award of actual damages for being unsubstantiated. Since actual
damages are awarded to compensate for a pecuniary loss, the injured
party is required to prove two things: (1) the fact of the injury or loss
and (2) the actual amount of loss with reasonable degree of certainty
premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence available. 8
Unfortunately, the prosecution was only able to sufficiently
substantiate actual damages in the amount of P77,593.42 for medical
and funeral expenses, and not P200,000.00 as awarded by the RTC.

Further, the CA likewise properly deleted the order for the


reparation of the stolen items because their values were not duly
proven. Art. 2199 of the Civil Code is clear that "one is entitled to an
adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him,
as he has duly proved." 9 On the other hand, it was correct to maintain
the order to pay Ronald Lava, the water station owner, the amount of
Pl,500.00 representing the stolen cash.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The January 31 ,


2019 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09999
which affirmed with modification the September 29, 2017 Decision of
the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 133 in Criminal Case
No. R-Iv!KT-16-00322-CR, finding Rolando Cariquez y Camba and
Reynaldo Cariquez y Camba guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294,
paragraph (1) of the Revised Penal Code is AFFIRMED. Accused-
appellants are SENTENCED to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua and are jointly and severally liable to PAY the heirs of the
victim Erner Bafias the following: (1) P77,593.42 as actual damages,
(2) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, (3) P75,000.00 as moral damages,
and (4) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages. Accused-appellants are
likewise ORDERED to PAY Ronald Lava the amount of Pl,500.00
as actual damages for the stolen cash.

- over -
105-A

7
People v. Salazar, G.R. No. 239138, February 17, 2021.
8
Yamauchiv. Suniga, 830 Phil. 122, 134 (2018).
9
Virayv. People, 720 Phil. 841 , 855 (2013).
RESOLUTION 4 G.R. No. 251011
December 7, 2021

All monetary awards shall earn legal interest at the rate of six
percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution
until fully paid.

So ORDERED." L opez, M ., J.., no part; Ll.ernan


'CI do, J..,
designated additional Member per Raffle dated November 9, 2020.

by:
MARIA TERESA B. SIBULO
Deputy Division Clerk of Court
105-A

The Solicitor General Court ofAppeals (x)


134 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village Manila
1229 Makati City (CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09999)

The Hon. Presiding Judge


Regional Trial Court, Br. 133
1200 Makati City
(Crim. Case No. R-MKT-16-00322-CR)

Public Information Office (x) PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE


Library Services (x) Special and Appealed Cases Service
Supreme Court Counsel for Accused-Appellant
(For uploading pursuant to A.M. DOJ Agencies Building
No. 12-7-1 -SC) Diliman, 1101 Quezon City

Philippine Judicial Academy (x) Messrs. Rolando Cariquez y Camba


Supreme Court & Reynaldo Cariquez y Camba
Accused-Appellants
Judgment Division (x) c/o The Director General
Supreme Court Bureau of Corrections
1770 Muntinlupa City

The Director General


Bureau of Corrections
1770 Muntinlupa City

UR

You might also like