Case Digest (G.R. No. 34888)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 34888)
Facts:
The People of the Philippine Islands v. Apolonio Dumduma and Candido Caindoy, G.R. No. 34888, August 19, 1931, the Supreme Court En Banc, Romualdez, J., writing for the Court.The prosecution (the People) charged defendants Apolonio Dumduma and Candido Caindoy with robbery with homicide for the killing of a Chinese merchant named Go Bongco (also referenced as Go Bunsuan). The Court of First Instance of Leyte convicted both defendants of robbery with homicide and sentenced them to life imprisonment with accessory penalties, ordered them jointly and severally to indemnify the heirs P1,000, and to pay costs. The defendants appealed, arguing that the evidence established, at most, that Apolonio alone committed homicide and that Candido should be acquitted.
The factual account at trial showed that Go Bongco left home with P22, treated (cured) Chua Siaco in La Paz and received P18 there, and was later seen exchanging loose change and carrying bills—establishing that he had about P40. He rode part of the way home in a motor car, then walked; later that night, while walking toward Dagami, he was attacked and killed. During the assault he reportedly cried out, "Wah-pay-ah! Apolonio take my money if you want, but don't kill me, for we are fellow-countrymen!" After the body was removed, witnesses noted that the money he had earlier was missing; only torn clothing and a handkerchief were found nearby.
Eyewitnesses described seeing two persons that evening, one later positively identified as Apolonio by Cornelio Balatar; others either did not recognize the second assailant at the scene or identified clothing (a pandan hat, undershirt, black trousers) matching what was later associated with Candido Caindoy. Crucially, the morning after the killing Mateo Amado saw Candido enter his billiard hall with bloodstained clothing; Candido allegedly admonished him to say nothing about the stains and later washed them off. An affidavit (Exhibit 2) corroborated aspects of this conduct. On appeal the Supreme Court reviewed the trial record and affirmed the Leyte court's conviction and sentence.
Issues:
- Was the crime committed robbery with homicide?
- Were both appellants, Apolonio Dumduma and Candido Caindoy, criminally liable as principals in the robbery with homicide, or should Candido have been acquitted and only Apolonio convicted of homicide?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)