G.R. No. 47899 - Manahan vs. People

Petitioner Alfonso Manahan, armed with a revolver and assisted by five companions, carried out a robbery.
They confronted Catalino Padayao, a servant of Meliton Carlos, using threat and intimidation.
The entry was made through an opening in the floor of Meliton Carlos’ camarin.
Approximately fifteen sacks of palay were taken from the camarin.

Petitioner and his companions repeated the criminal act.
They again employed the same tactics of threat and intimidation against Catalino Padayao and Felicidad Cabungcal, another servant of Meliton Carlos.
This time, six sacks of palay were extracted through the same opening in the floor.

The Court of Appeals found petitioner guilty of robbery under Article 294, No. 5, of the Revised Penal Code.
The charge was aggravated by the circumstance of nocturnity.
An indeterminate penalty was imposed, ranging from 6 months and 1 day of prision correccional to 6 years, 10 months and 1 day of prision mayor, along with other accessory penalties and a proportionate part of the costs.
The issue of indemnity was reserved to a separate civil action due to uncertainties in evidentiary matters.

Petitioner contended that since the stolen property consisted of cereals, the lighter penalty provided in Article 303 of the Revised Penal Code should apply.
He argued that Article 303 refers to robbery committed through the use of force upon things.
Despite the fact that an opening was made on the floor (implying force upon things), he maintained that this should result in a less severe penalty.

Whether the robbery should be penalized under Article 294, No. 5 of the Revised Penal Code (which emphasizes violence against or intimidation of persons) or under Article 303 (which provides a lighter penalty for force upon things).
Whether the element of violence against or intimidation of persons controls the qualification of the crime, even when the act involved force upon things (i.e., the creation of an opening in the floor).
What should be the appropriate minimum penalty, given that the minimum should fall within the arresto mayor category, specifically adjusted to 6 months of arresto mayor.