Case Digest (G.R. No. 181138)
Facts:
This case involves petitioners Ricky "Totsie" Marquez, Roy Bernardo, Jomer Magalong, and Ryan Benzon, who were charged with the crime of robbery with force upon things. The incident occurred on April 6, 2002, in Caloocan City. The private complainant, Sonia Valderosa, reported that the Rice-in-a-Box store she operated was forcibly broken into; the padlock was destroyed, and various items worth approximately ₱42,000.00, including rice cookers, a blender, and food items, were stolen. The petitioners, along with Benzon, were alleged to have conspired and executed the robbery by breaking the padlock and unlawfully taking the items from the store, which they then brought to Benzon’s uncle’s house.
During trial, a co-conspirator, Marlon Mallari, testified that Marquez planned the robbery and assigned roles to each member, including himself as the lookout, and that the group collectively took the stolen items. Despite allegations of denial and alibi by the petitioners, the
...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 181138)
Facts:
- Charge and Arraignment
- Petitioners Ricky “Totsie” Marquez, Roy Bernardo, Jomer Magalong, and accused Ryan Benzon were charged with Robbery With Force Upon Things under Criminal Case No. C-65837.
- The Information alleged that on April 6, 2002, in Caloocan City, petitioners destroyed the padlock of Sonia Valderosa’s stall (Rice-in-a-Box store) and unlawfully took various items valued at P42,000.00.
- All accused pleaded not guilty during arraignment.
- Trial Proceedings
- Trial ensued after pre-trial conference; Benzon failed to appear despite notice and was tried in absentia.
- Prosecution presented Marlon Mallari, a co-conspirator, who testified that Marquez proposed and led the robbery, Magalong and Bernardo smashed the padlock, petitioners along with Benzon entered and took merchandise, and Mallari acted as look-out.
- Items taken included rice cookers, a blender, boxes of rice, fresh meat, sauces, kitchen utensils, and radios, totaling approximately P42,000.
- Victim Valderosa confirmed the burglary, discovering the padlock destroyed and inventory missing after notification from the building owner’s daughter.
- Mallari confessed his involvement first to his brother and later to Valderosa, triggering the arrests of petitioners.
- Petitioners testified they were elsewhere (videoke session and eating lugaw) near the scene but did not report the robbery when they saw the store opened.
- Lower Courts’ Decisions
- Regional Trial Court (RTC) found petitioners guilty based on Mallari’s testimony and affirmed the value of stolen goods, sentencing them to imprisonment and indemnity payment.
- Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed RTC ruling, holding Mallari’s testimony credible and sufficient despite being uncorroborated, also affirming conspiracy among petitioners.
- The CA erred in applying Article 299 (robbery in inhabited house), as the store was not an inhabited house but an uninhabited private building; however, its conviction and sentences were affirmed with modification by the Supreme Court (SC).
Issues:
- Whether the CA erred in affirming the RTC’s conviction of petitioners for robbery with force upon things in conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether the testimony of the co-conspirator Mallari, uncorroborated and given in exchange for state witness immunity or benefit, was sufficient and credible to sustain petitioners’ conviction.
- Whether the trial courts properly applied the law on the nature of the robbery (inhabited vs. uninhabited place) and imposed the correct penalties.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)