Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Juada y Navarro
Case
G.R. No. 252276
Decision Date
Nov 11, 2021
Jerrico Juada convicted of robbery with homicide for killing Florante Garcia, stealing ₱110,000 and a pistol. Circumstantial evidence, witness testimonies, and recovered items established guilt. Penalty: reclusion perpetua without parole, plus civil liabilities.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 252276)

Charges and Legal Basis

Jerrico was charged under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended by Republic Act (RA) No. 7659, for robbery with homicide, involving the taking of money and a firearm from Florante Garcia, who was fatally shot during the commission of the robbery. RA No. 9346, which prohibits the death penalty in the Philippines, is also applicable in this case in relation to penalty imposition.

Facts Established by Prosecution

Multiple witnesses testified to the circumstances surrounding the crime, including Amalia Valentin, who saw a man in a white cap, red and blue jacket, and blue handkerchief shoot the victim and rob his belongings. Angel Bonbon, a carinderia employee, corroborated this description and identified the accused through his booking sheet and in court after recovering the suspect’s bloodstained clothing and personal effects. Police officers found the crime scene, recovered the motorcycle used, and corroborated witness statements. Marlon Geronimo testified that Jerrico borrowed his motorcycle on the date of the incident and later apologized for the involvement, indicating consciousness of guilt or awareness of the act.

Defense Testimony and Arguments

Jerrico denied involvement, claiming an alibi suggesting he was elsewhere during the time of the incident. He testified that he borrowed a motorcycle to buy spare parts and later lost it at the fish port. Other defense witnesses provided testimony to support his alibi and presence elsewhere. However, the defense’s denial and alibi lacked clear and convincing evidence to dispel the prosecution’s circumstantial evidence.

Trial Court’s Findings and Ruling

The RTC found Jerrico guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on a solid chain of circumstantial evidence that linked him to the robbery with homicide. The Court emphasized that circumstantial evidence, when forming an unbroken chain leading to a single conclusion excluding all others, is sufficient for conviction. The RTC sentenced Jerrico to reclusion perpetua and awarded civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages of PHP 100,000.00 each to the victim’s heirs.

Court of Appeals’ Affirmation

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s conviction and ruling in its June 20, 2019 decision, dismissing the appellant’s claim of mistaken identity and failure of proof. The CA upheld that the prosecution established an unbroken chain of circumstances pointing solely to Jerrico as the perpetrator, thereby sustaining the conviction based on circumstantial evidence.

Supreme Court’s Analysis on Circumstantial Evidence

The Supreme Court reiterated the rule that circumstantial evidence is admissible and sufficient to convict so long as it meets the criteria of fifteen tested circumstances producing a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. The Court applied this doctrine, emphasizing that the evidence consistently identified Jerrico as the assailant and that his defenses of denial and alibi were self-serving and not supported by strong evidence.

Elements and Nature of Robbery with Homicide

The Court expounded on the elements of robbery with homicide under Article 294 of the RPC: (1) taking of personal property with violence or intimidation; (2) the property belongs to another; (3) intent to gain; and (4) homicide was committed on occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court explained that the homicide is incidental to the robbery and need not be premeditated as a separate crime.

Treachery as a Generic Aggravating Circumstance

Although treachery is not an element of robbery with homicide, the Court held that the killing of Florante was committed treacherously. Treachery, defined by the stealthy and unexpected nature of the attack that precludes the victim’s defense or retaliation, serves as a generic aggravating circumstance that increases the penalty. The Court cited precedents such as People v. Escote, Jr. and People v. Baron, confirming treachery’s role as a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide.

Penalty Imposition and Effect of RA No. 9346

The Court clarified that the presence of treachery would ordinarily elevate the penalty to death. However, due to RA No. 9346 prohibiting the death penalty, Jerrico m

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.