Title
People vs. Laurente y Bejasa
Case
G.R. No. 116734
Decision Date
Mar 29, 1996
Accused-appellant convicted of homicide, not highway robbery with homicide, as robbery was unproven; alibi rejected due to credible eyewitness testimony.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 116734)

Facts:

  • Procedural History
    • The RTC of Pasig (Branch 156) found Larry Laurente y Bejasa guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Highway Robbery with Homicide under P.D. No. 532 and imposed:
      • Death penalty
      • Indemnity to heirs: ₱50,000
      • Funeral expenses: ₱27,300
      • Moral/exemplary damages: ₱100,000
    • Automatic review by the Supreme Court under Art. 47, RPC as amended by R.A. No. 7659.
  • Incident Circumstances
    • On 14 February 1994, victim Herminiano G. Artana was found dead in his parked taxi along F. Concepcion St., Pasig.
      • Cause of death: strangulation by leather belt plus blunt‐force head injuries.
      • Autopsy (Dr. Arañas) confirmed subdural/subarachnoid hemorrhages, peri‐orbital hematoma, neck contusion.
    • Investigative findings:
      • Eyewitness Myra Guinto saw three men scramble out of the taxi and flee; a fourth called police.
      • A brown wallet containing Laurente’s SSS ID and the leather belt were recovered inside.
      • Police “follow-up” arrested Laurente the next day; he allegedly admitted participation and was identified in a line-up.
      • Victim’s daughter testified to funeral expenses (₱27,300) and that her father was a taxi driver.
  • Defense
    • Alibi: Laurente claimed he was intoxicated at home from ~3:30 p.m. to 4 a.m., unconscious and wallet lost thereafter; he worked 6 a.m.–8 p.m. on 15 Feb 1994.
    • Custodial issues: arrest without warrant based solely on ID card; interrogation without counsel; admission not reduced to writing.

Issues:

  • Application of P.D. No. 532 and death penalty
    • Does P.D. 532 cover a robbery against a predetermined victim?
    • Did R.A. No. 7659 validly restore the death penalty for P.D. 532 offenses?
  • Sufficiency and admissibility of evidence
    • Reliability of eyewitness identification (Myra Guinto).
    • Proof of the robbery element (asportation, victim’s earnings).
    • Lawfulness of arrest and admissibility of the alleged confession.
  • Defense of alibi and penalty imposition
    • Was alibi sufficiently proven?
    • Appropriate penalty given constitutional and statutory constraints.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.