Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Laguda y Rodibiso
Case
G.R. No. 244843
Decision Date
Oct 7, 2020
Ronald Laguda conspired in a robbery-homicide, driving a tricycle enabling a fatal shooting; convicted, sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 211105)

Antecedents of the Case

The events unfolded when Herminia Sonon y Bolantes and Marieta Dela Rosa y Apelado were victims of a robbery conducted by Ronald and three accomplices on a jeepney. Ronald boarded the jeepney, armed with an ice pick, and threatened the passengers while his accomplices waited nearby. After robbing the victims, Ronald drove a tricycle to facilitate their escape, during which officer Magno, responding to a call for help, was fatally shot by one of Ronald's companions.

Charges and Trial Proceedings

Ronald was charged with robbery with homicide under the Revised Penal Code, specifically for his direct involvement in both the robbery and the subsequent murder of PO2 Magno. At trial, Ronald pleaded not guilty and raised an alibi, claiming he was elsewhere at the time of the incident. However, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) found him guilty based on the testimonies of the victims and other witnesses, establishing that Ronald had conspired with his accomplices not only to commit robbery but also to murder.

RTC's Ruling

The RTC sentenced Ronald to reclusion perpetua, imposing damages for the victim’s heirs, which included civil indemnity and compensation for lost income. Ronald's appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) contested the legality of his warrantless arrest and the alleged lack of conspiracy in the crime committed.

Court of Appeals Decision

On January 10, 2018, the CA upheld the RTC's conviction, emphasizing the overwhelming evidence of Ronald's active participation in the robbery and murder. The court highlighted how Ronald had utilized the vehicle to assist in the assault on Officer Magno, thus reinforcing the prosecution's claim of conspiracy among the perpetrators.

Legal Framework and Ruling

The appellate court outlined the elements of the crime of robbery with homicide as defined in Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. It noted that the essential components—violence, intent to gain, and the crime of homicide arising from the robbery—were all met in this case. The CA rejected Ronald's claims of innocence, asserting his actions demonstrated complicity and intent aligned with the co-conspirators.

Misplaced Defenses

Ronald's reliance on the defense of alibi was deemed insufficient, as he failed to provide credible evidence supporting his claim of being elsewhere during the commission of the crime. The court stated that an alibi must be corroborated by tangible evidence, which Ronald did not provide, ultimately finding that his denials and excuses did not outweigh the credible testimonies against him.

On the Issue of Conspiracy

The CA emphasized that conspiracy may be inferred from the coordinated actions of the individuals involved. Ronald'

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.