Case Digest (G.R. No. 87236)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Victor Taneo y Canada, alias Opao, a Certain Bebot Escoreal and a Certain Roy Codilla, Accused; Roy Codilla, Accused‑Appellant, G.R. No. 87236, February 08, 1993, Supreme Court Third Division, Davide, Jr., J., writing for the Court.On December 29, 1986, Assistant City Fiscal Salvador O. Solima filed an Information in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu charging the three named respondents with robbery with homicide for an incident on December 22, 1986 at the residence of Dr. Herminia Sia in Cebu City. The Information alleged that the assailants entered the inhabited house, stole various cassette recorders, tapes and other items valued at P13,600, and, in the course of the robbery, assaulted the maid, Landa (Landa/Linda) Robert, who later died of her injuries.
On February 9, 1987, at arraignment before the RTC (Branch 10, Judge Leonardo B. Canares), Victor Taneo pleaded guilty and was sentenced to reclusion perpetua; Roy Codilla pleaded not guilty and trial on the merits proceeded against him. Co‑accused Bebot Escoreal remained at large and an alias warrant was returned unserved.
During the trial the prosecution presented witnesses including Dr. Herminia Sia, accused Victor Taneo (who testified against Codilla), Patrolman Enrico Ministerio and Dr. Jaime Perez (the treating physician). The defense called the appellant Codilla, Police Cpl. Jovito Roa and several character/alibi witnesses. The trial court summarized testimony showing that Codilla allegedly planned the burglary as revenge, that Taneo and others followed Codilla's directions into the house, that the maid was struck with bottles and later identified Codilla as her assailant while at the hospital, and that stolen items were recovered.
In a Decision promulgated December 14, 1988, the RTC found Roy Codilla guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordered joint and several indemnity with Taneo to the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P30,000, and imposed costs. The trial court credited Dr. Sia’s testimony and the testimony of co‑accused Taneo, treated the maid’s hospital statement as res gestae, and rejected Codilla’s alibi.
Codilla filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals; the records were erroneously transmitted to that court, which forwarded them to the Supreme Court on March 10, 1989. The Supreme Court accepted the appeal on September 20, 1989. Codilla, through appointed counsel (after his private counsel ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in admitting and relying on the statement made by the victim Landa Robert at the hospital as part of the res gestae?
- Did the trial court err in giving weight to and relying on the testimony of co‑accused Victor Taneo?
- Was the identity of accused Roy Codilla sufficiently established so that his ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)