Case Digest (G.R. No. 217722)
Facts:
The case involves Jomar Ablaza y Caparas (petitioner) and the People of the Philippines (respondent). The events transpired on July 29, 2010, in Olongapo City, Philippines. Petitioner and his co-accused, Jay Lauzon y Farrales, were charged with robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons under paragraph 5, Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). The Information filed against them stated that they conspired to forcibly take three necklaces from the victim, Rosario S. Snyder, valued at a total of P70,100.00. During the trial, Snyder testified that while walking along Jolo Street, she was approached by two men on a motorcycle, one of whom grabbed her necklaces. After the incident, Snyder reported to the police and identified the petitioner from photographs. The petitioner denied involvement, claiming he was asleep at the time of the incident. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found both accused guilty, citing the elements of robbery were present, including the use...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 217722)
Facts:
Incident Details: On July 29, 2010, Rosario S. Snyder was walking along Jolo Street, Barangay Barreto, Olongapo City, when a motorcycle with two men on board stopped beside her. The backrider grabbed her three necklaces worth a total of Php 70,100.00. The men then sped away after Snyder shouted for help, and a tricycle driver failed to catch them. Snyder reported the incident to the police.
Identification of Accused: At the police station, Snyder identified Jomar Ablaza y Caparas (petitioner) as the driver of the motorcycle from photographs. She also identified Jay Lauzon y Farrales (co-accused) as the backrider. Both were later found at Ablaza’s house, where Lauzon was hiding under the kitchen sink.
Defense’s Claim: Ablaza claimed he was asleep at home during the incident and denied involvement. He argued that Snyder could not have accurately identified him because she was looking for a “tisoy” with a tattoo, which he was not.
Issue:
- Whether the guilt of petitioner Jomar Ablaza y Caparas was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether the crime committed was robbery or theft.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court partially granted the petition. While the Court upheld the credibility of Snyder’s testimony and maintained that Ablaza was guilty, it modified the crime from robbery to theft. The Court found that the prosecution failed to sufficiently prove that violence or intimidation was used in taking Snyder’s necklaces, which are essential elements of robbery.
Ratio:
- (Unlock)