Title
People vs. Palema y Vargas
Case
G.R. No. 228000
Decision Date
Jul 10, 2019
Three men attacked Enicasio Depante during a robbery attempt, stabbing him fatally. Convicted of robbery with homicide, their appeal was dismissed; damages were ordered for the victim's heirs.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 228000)

Events Leading to the Charge

The Information filed on November 26, 2007, alleged that at around 11:05 PM, the accused, acting in concert with Lester Ladra y Palema, Edwin Manzanero y Bautista, and Marvin Marqueses, attempted to steal a cell phone from Enicasio by using violence and intimidation. During the commission of the robbery, Enicasio was stabbed and later died as a result of the injuries sustained.

Arraignment and Charges

Upon arraignment, Ladra, Saldua, Palema, Palmea, and Grengia pleaded not guilty, while Marqueses remained at large. Post-arraignment, the prosecution presented evidence that included testimonies of witnesses present during the crime, notably the family of the victim and an eyewitness.

Testimonies and Evidence Presented

Eyewitness accounts detailed that the accused approached Enicasio, leading to a physical confrontation wherein Palema stabbed the victim. Despite attempts by Enicasio's family to intervene and help him, he succumbed to his injuries after being taken to a medical facility. Testimony from the family revealed incurred expenses amounting to medical bills and funeral costs.

Defense Strategy

The accused-appellants maintained their innocence, denying any participation in the crime. They argued that they were at the plaza but not as a group and contested the credibility of the witnesses. Notably, Ladra later changed his plea to guilty, providing a clearer account of the events leading to the attack on Enicasio.

Regional Trial Court's Decision

On April 15, 2013, the Regional Trial Court found Palema, Palmea, Saldua, and Grengia guilty of robbery with homicide, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua. The court held that the actions of the accused demonstrated conspiracy to commit the crime, affirming that the intent to rob existed and that the homicide arose directly from this intent. They were also ordered to pay damages to Enicasio's heirs.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

The accused appealed the Regional Trial Court's decision, arguing flaws in the witness testimonies, particularly discrepancies regarding the location of the stab wound and the existence of conspiracy. The Court of Appeals, however, upheld the Trial Court’s ruling, emphasizing the credibility of the witnesses and the circumstantial evidence that confirmed the existence of conspiracy among the accused.

Supreme Court's Ruling

Upon review, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' ruling and the Regional Trial Court's decision. The Court discussed the nature of robbery with homicide as defined under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code, affirming that the original intent of the perpetrators must be to commit robbery, with

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.