Case Summary (G.R. No. L-19491)
Petitioner and Respondent
• Petitioner seeks affirmation of death sentence imposed under Articles 294(1) and 296 of the Revised Penal Code.
• Respondent challenges the appreciation of Article 296 (use of unlicensed firearm) as a special aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide.
Key Dates
• Offense committed: May 23, 1961, Mabini, Bohol.
• Trial court conviction and sentence: August 30, 1961.
• Supreme Court decision: August 30, 1968.
Applicable Law
• Constitution: Pre-1987 Philippine legal regime (1935 Constitution).
• Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815, 1930), as amended by Republic Acts No. 12 (1946) and No. 373 (1949):
– Art. 294(1): Robbery with homicide, penalty reclusion perpetua to death.
– Art. 295: Robbery in an uninhabited place or by a band (subdivisions 3–5 of Art. 294), maximum period.
– Art. 296: Definition of band; special aggravation for use of unlicensed firearm.
• Code of Criminal Procedure: Rules on plea of guilty, aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
Procedural History
- Second amended information charged robbery with homicide by a band, use of unlicensed firearms, and aggravating circumstances (dwelling, nighttime, superior strength).
- Respondent initially pleaded not guilty, later vacillated but ultimately entered a categorical plea of guilty after repeated warnings.
- Trial court found plea ambiguous, reopened proceedings, then accepted definite plea of guilty and imposed death.
- Automatic review before the Supreme Court.
Issue
Whether Article 296’s special aggravating circumstance of using an unlicensed firearm applies to robbery with homicide under Article 294(1), thereby rendering the death penalty mandatory.
Holdings
- Article 296 is corollary exclusively to Article 295, which applies only to subdivisions 3–5 of Art. 294 (robbery in band without homicide or rape).
- Since Art. 295 no longer covers Art. 294(1) (robbery with homicide), the special aggravator of unlicensed firearm cannot enhance the penalty for homicide.
- The trial court erred in treating Article 296 as applicable to robbery with homicide.
- Aggravating circumstances (band, dwelling, nighttime) outweigh the single valid mitigating circumstance (plea of guilty).
- Death penalty cannot be imposed for lack of the requisite number of votes; sentence reduced to reclusion perpetua.
Reasoning
• Statutory Construction: Articles 295 and 296 must be read in pari materia. Art. 295 limits robbery in band to subdivisions 3–5 of Art. 294; Art. 296 amplifies only that context.
• Legislative Amendment: Republic Act 373 (1949) excluded Art. 294(1) and (2) from
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-19491)
Facts of the Case
- On or about May 23, 1961, at approximately 7:00 PM, the accused and at least five armed companions unlawfully entered the dwelling of Honorato and Antonia Miano in Mabini, Bohol.
- Inside, they attacked, hacked, and shot Geronimo Miano and Norberto Aton, causing fatal injuries.
- The perpetrators also took cash amounting to ₱322.00 belonging to the Miano family.
- The trial court ordered the accused to indemnify the heirs of each deceased victim in the amount of ₱6,000.00.
Procedural History
- August 2, 1961: Accused Apolonio Apduhan, Jr., Rodulfo Huiso and Felipe Quimson pleaded not guilty to a second amended information charging robbery with homicide under Art. 294(1) and alleging special aggravation under Art. 296.
- August 9, 1961: Counsel de oficio was appointed for Apduhan; he attempted to change his plea to guilty but conditioned it on life imprisonment. Repeated judicial warnings failed to deter his equivocation.
- A five-minute recess ensued; upon return, Apduhan insisted on pleading guilty, acknowledging the risk of a death sentence.
- August 30, 1961: The trial court found the plea initially “indefinite,” reopened proceedings, and secured a clear plea of guilty.
- On the same date, the court convicted Apduhan of robbery with homicide and sentenced him to death, plus indemnities.
Issues on Automatic Review
- Whether the use of unlicensed firearms qualifies as a special aggravating circumstance under Art. 296 in a robbery-with-homicide case punishable under Art. 294(1).
- The proper interplay among Arts. 294, 295 and 296 of the Revised Penal Code.
- The correct appreciation and balancing of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in fixing the penalty.
Statutory Provisions and Interpretation
- Art. 294(1): Defines “robbery with homicide” — penalty ranges from reclusion perpetua to death when homicide attends the robbery.
- Art. 295: Imposes maximum p