G.R. No. L-41008 - People vs. Pecato

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-41008)

Commencement of Criminal Charges and Pre-Trial Events

The Information alleged that on or about 1 November 1971, in Gigaguit, Surigao del Norte, the accused, conspiring and helping one another, with deadly weapons including a .22 revolver, sharp pointed instruments, and shotguns, committed robbery with the intent of gain by violence and intimidation. It further alleged that, to enable the taking of PHP 350.00, the accused, with intent to kill and with several qualifying aggravating circumstances, attacked and shot Felix Larong, inflicting injuries described in the autopsy findings, which resulted in his death, while also manhandling Uldarica Larong and taking money from her. The Information ultimately invoked Article 294, paragraph 1, while listing the generic aggravating circumstance of treachery and other aggravating circumstances including insult or disregard of rank, in band, use of superior strength, and nighttime.

Upon arraignment on 18 February 1974, Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda, together with the surviving co-accused Arturo Pecato, pleaded not guilty. Before the trial could proceed, Arturo Pecato died on 23 June 1974, and the record noted that his criminal responsibility was extinguished. The case nonetheless proceeded against Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda.

Trial Court Findings and Conviction

After trial, the trial court rendered a lengthy decision dated 4 February 1975, convicting Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. It found the presence of aggravating circumstances of treachery, disregard of rank, in band, abuse of superior strength, and nighttime, with no mitigating circumstance to offset them. It then imposed the supreme penalty of death by electrocution and ordered joint and several indemnity to the heirs of Felix Larong in the amount of PHP 12,000.00, plus the proportionate share of costs. It also ordered forfeiture of a home-made shotgun identified as Exhibit “D.” As to Victoriano Leyros, who was at large, the trial court ordered the case to be archived without prejudice to reinstatement upon apprehension.

Factual Background of the Crime

The Supreme Court recounted that the incident occurred at about nine o’clock in the evening of 1 November 1971 in Lahi, Gigaquit, Surigao del Norte. Felix Larong, about 70 years old, and his family, including his wife Luciana Larong (about 85 years old) and their 31-year-old unmarried daughter Uldarica Larong, were preparing to sleep in their small one-room house (measuring 412 by 5 meters).

Several men called from outside and, after greeting the occupants, requested entry. Felix Larong opened the door, and four men each carrying a gun entered. After gaining entrance, the intruders greeted the family again and used flashlights to illuminate the interior, despite the presence of a lighted kerosene lamp inside the house. They ordered the occupants to lie face down and demanded money from Felix Larong. When he said he had no money and no pistol, one of the intruders asked whether he recognized them. Felix Larong answered in the affirmative because they were still his relatives. While he remained face down on the floor, Arturo Pecato shot him, and Felix Larong died from shotgun wounds.

Afterward, the intruders turned to Uldarica Larong and demanded money. When she refused, they manhandled her and hit her with the gun butt on different parts of her body, including striking the side of her face. Luciana Larong ordered her daughter to give the money, and Uldarica Larong initially gave PHP 300.00 and later an additional PHP 50.00 when the intruders demanded more. The intruders then left. Fearful they might return, Uldarica and Luciana hid among bushes nearby. When the robbers returned and found no one, they left again after about an hour. The crime was reported the next morning, 2 November 1971, and police investigation followed.

Identification, Arrest, and Prosecution Evidence

Police investigation was carried out immediately after the incident. The policemen went to the Larongs’ house and asked who perpetrated the crime. The two women positively identified and pointed to Arturo Pecato, Felix Pecato, Victoriano Leyros, and Ereneo Peruda as the perpetrators. Based on this identification, police arrested Arturo Pecato and Felix Pecato on 2 November 1971 at separate residences in Lahi, while Ereneo Peruda was apprehended on 3 November 1971 in the poblacion of Gigaquit. Victoriano Leyros remained at large and was never arrested.

At trial, the prosecution presented witnesses including: Dominador Paray (a police officer), Judge Capistrano C. Navallo (municipal judge who conducted the preliminary examination), Nicasio Erazo (Chief of Police), Dr. Bernardo Moran (who interpreted and explained autopsy findings), and Uldarica Larong. The widow, Luciana Vda. de Larong, did not testify in person, but her deposition dated 16 January 1973 was admitted as Exhibit “C”.

Defense Evidence and the Alibi Offered by the Accused

The defense attacked the prosecution’s identification and advanced alibi. Felix Pecato claimed he was at home on the night of 1 November 1971 and did not leave. He asserted he was sick with fever and chills and that his wife, child, and mother were with him, with his mother massaging him. He was corroborated by his mother, Vicenta Pelajes Pecato, who testified that she spent that night in her son’s house taking care of his illness and that he did not go out.

Ereneo Peruda likewise denied participation and claimed he spent the entire night of 1 November 1971 at home with his family and guests, including a small feast held in his house for his younger sister’s birthday. He claimed he retired to sleep around eleven o’clock and woke at about eight o’clock the next morning, never leaving the house. This narration was supported by defense witnesses Felicidario Bayla and Daniel Latorre, both of whom testified that they were at Peruda’s house after the afternoon cockfight and that they did not notice him leave while they were present.

The defense also presented other evidence: Encarnacion Peruda, a relative connected to Peruda’s family, testified that she inquired from Uldarica Larong after learning of Felix Larong’s death, and that Uldarica allegedly said their faces were covered or masked. Francisco Gonzales, then Municipal Mayor of Gigaquit, testified that he was approached by the mother of Arturo and Felix Pecato for help while they were detained, and that he summoned the Chief of Police to ensure the detainees were cared for.

The Supreme Court’s Core Issue: Identification Versus Alibi

The Supreme Court identified the “crux” of the review as whether positive identification by the prosecution witnesses prevailed over the alibi. It held that the prosecution met its burden. It emphasized that Luciana Larong and Uldarica Larong were the victims who identified the accused as among the intruders who entered the home, robbed the family of PHP 350.00, killed Felix Larong, and assaulted Uldarica. The Court noted the witnesses did not waver from the immediate police investigation through the preliminary examination and trial.

The Court reasoned that recognition was possible because there was a lighted kerosene lamp inside the house and the intruders were not wearing masks, hats, or other items to hide identity. It further considered that the witnesses and the appellants were close relatives, and that such proximity would not readily permit a fabricated capital accusation. The Court rejected the defense theory of “bad blood” as motive. That alleged ill-will was traced to prior events involving relatives, including a stabbing incident involving Jose Escudo (a grandson of the victim Felix Larong) and claims of hacking by Escudo against Peruda’s father. The Court concluded that the supposed motive was not proven satisfactorily and characterized it as insufficient to explain accusations by close relatives that would entail the extreme penalty of death.

Evaluation of the Defense Alibi

The Court applied settled rules that alibi cannot prevail over positive identification, especially where there was no physical impossibility for the accused to be at the scene. It also found that the alibi was weak: Felix Pecato’s alibi depended mainly on the appellant himself and his mother, rather than on third parties who would naturally corroborate such claim. The Court cited its view that a mother’s corroboration of her son’s alibi “scarcely merits any probative value” because it is inherently biased toward exculpating the accused.

It further held that alibi is “at best a weak defense and easy of fabrication,” particularly among close relatives. Crucially, it found that both appellants resided near the crime scene, such that the trip to the victims’ house would take less than two hours, removing any notion of physical impossibility. The Court concluded that the defense did not rebut the victims’ identification and did not undermine the prosecution’s narration of the robbery and killing.

Legal Characterization of the Crime: Robbery with Homicide

After determining that identification and participation were established, the Court addressed the proper crime. It held that the crime committed was robbery with homicide under Article 294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code, since Felix Larong was shot to death during the robbery. The Court reiterated doctrine that as long as homicide results during or because of the robbery, robbery with homicide is committed, regardless of whether the killing was accidental. It also held that all principals in the robbery are liable as principals in the special complex crime even if they did not personally take part in the homicide unless they endeavored to prevent the killing. It found no showing that either appellant attempted to prevent the killing; the evidence showed that they merely stood watching.

The Court also stated that “homicide” in the context

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-41008)

The People of the Philippines sought automatic review of a Court of First Instance decision finding Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code.
The Court of First Instance of Surigao del Norte, 15th Judicial District, Branch II sentenced the two accused to death by electrocution, ordered indemnity to the heirs of Felix Larong in P12,000.00, and ordered payment of their proportionate share of costs.
The charge in the Information alleged robbery with homicide committed by Arturo Pecato, Felix Pecato, Victoriano Leyros, and Ereneo Peruda through conspiracy and participation in taking P350.00, shooting Felix Larong, and manhandling Uldarica Larong.
The record showed that only three accused (Arturo Pecato, Felix Pecato, and Ereneo Peruda) were arrested, while Victoriano Leyros remained at large.
Arturo Pecato died before the actual trial, and his criminal responsibility was treated as extinguished, so the case proceeded against Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda.
Upon arraignment on February 18, 1974, Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda pleaded not guilty, and the trial court proceeded with trial.

Key factual narrative

The robbery and killing occurred at about nine o’clock in the evening of November 1, 1971 in Lahi, Gigaquit, Surigao del Norte, when Felix Larong (about seventy years old), Luciana Larong (about eighty-five years old), and their unmarried daughter Uldarica Larong (about thirty-one years old) were preparing to sleep.
Several men called from outside and requested permission to enter after bidding “good evening.”
After Felix Larong opened the door, four heavily armed men entered, greeted the occupants again, and used flashlights to illuminate the interior of the house despite the presence of a lighted kerosene lamp.
The intruders ordered the victims to lie face down and demanded money from Felix Larong, and when he said he had none, they demanded that he produce a pistol.
One intruder asked whether Felix Larong recognized them, and when Felix Larong answered in the affirmative based on their being relatives, Arturo Pecato shot him.
Felix Larong died due to the shotgun wounds inflicted.
The intruders then demanded money from Uldarica Larong and, upon her refusal, manhandled her and struck her with a gun butt on different parts of her body, including a blow to the side of her face.
Luciana Larong directed Uldarica Larong to give money while the attack continued, and Uldarica gave P300.00 and then an additional P50.00 when more was demanded.
The intruders left after the extortion, and after about an hour the victims later saw the robbers return and then depart again when no one was present.
The robbery-killing was reported to the police on November 2, 1971, and the police investigated thereafter.

Identification and arrest timeline

The police investigators asked Luciana Larong and Uldarica Larong who perpetrated the crime, and both women positively identified and pointed to Arturo Pecato, Felix Pecato, Victoriano Leyros, and Ereneo Peruda.
Based on the victims’ identification, the police arrested Arturo Pecato and Felix Pecato on November 2, 1971 at their separate residences in Lahi.
Ereneo Peruda was arrested the following day, November 3, 1971, in the Poblacion of Gigaquit.
Victoriano Leyros was never apprehended, and thus remained at large.

Witnesses and evidentiary posture

The prosecution presented five witnesses: Dominador Paray (policeman who conducted investigation), Judge Capistrano C. Navallo (municipal judge who conducted preliminary examination), Nicasio Erazo (Chief of Police of Gigaquit), Dr. Bernardo Moran (medical witness interpreting the autopsy report submitted by Dr. Celso Valmores), and Uldarica Larong.
The prosecution did not present Luciana Larong at trial, but it introduced her deposition dated January 16, 1973 as Exhibit “C” after the trial court gave express permission for the use of the deposition.
The defense presented witnesses Felicidario Bayla, Daniel Latorre, Encarnacion Peruda, Vicenta Pelajes Pecato, Francisco Gonzales, and also the two accused Felix Pecato and Ereneo Peruda.
The prosecution’s case rested on the victims’ identification and the circumstances of lighting, non-masking, and the victims’ ability to recognize the intruders.

Defense theories raised

The defense disputed culpability primarily through alibi, invoking that the accused were at home during the time of the crime.
Felix Pecato claimed he was at his house on the night of November 1, 1971, and he asserted he was sick with fever and chills and did not go out.
Felix Pecato alleged that he spent the night with his wife, their child, and his mother, who massaged him.
Vicenta Pelajes Pecato, Felix’s mother, corroborated the alibi by testifying that she spent the night in Felix’s house to take care of him and that he did not leave because he remained weak and recuperating.
Ereneo Peruda also claimed an alibi, stating he spent the whole night at his home with his family and guests.
Ereneo Peruda narrated that early that night they held a small feast due to a younger sister’s birthday and that he retired to sleep around eleven o’clock, then allegedly never went out until about eight o’clock the next morning.
Felicidario Bayla testified that after meeting Ereneo Peruda late in the afternoon of All Saints’ Day after a cockfight, Bayla went with him to Peruda’s house for a small party and that Ereneo never left during Bayla’s three-hour stay.
Daniel Latorre testified that after meeting Ereneo after the cockfight, he went to Peruda’s house, spent the night there, slept beside Ereneo, and never noticed Ereneo leave.
Encarnacion Peruda testified that she inquired from Uldarica Larong after Felix Larong’s death and stated that Uldarica allegedly said the victims could not recognize the malefactors because their faces were covered or masked and they wore hats.
Francisco Gonzales, the then Municipal Mayor of Gigaquit, testified mainly that he was approached by the mother of Arturo and Felix Pecato for help to prevent the detainees from being mau