Title
People vs. Ponciano y Sabolan
Case
G.R. No. 86453
Decision Date
Dec 5, 1991
Intoxicated accused stabbed three victims, stole items; convicted of three homicides and theft, not robbery with homicide, due to lack of premeditated intent.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 183622)

Procedural History

This appeal arises from a decision rendered by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 171, Valenzuela, Metro Manila. The appellant was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with multiple homicide and sentenced to reclusion perpetua on three counts. The court ordered him to pay the heirs of the deceased for funeral expenses and damages.

Summary of Allegations

The information filed against the appellant described acts of robbery committed with violence, including the use of a bladed instrument against the victims. It alleged that the accused had unlawfully taken several items belonging to Alejandro Rivera and inflicted fatal injuries on the victims, resulting in their deaths.

Prosecution Evidence

The prosecution presented several eyewitness accounts establishing the appellant's presence at the crime scene and his involvement in the killings. Key witnesses included Eulogio Sanchez, Rowena Fernandez-Rivera, and Orlando Silvestre, who testified about their experiences during the events of the evening. These testimonies illustrated the drinking session that escalated into violence, wherein the appellant brandished a knife and attacked the victims.

Appellant's Defense

The appellant claimed he was under the influence of alcohol and drugs during the incident and did not have a clear recollection of what transpired. He denied intending to commit robbery and contended that any theft was an afterthought following the violence. He also challenged the sufficiency of the prosecution's evidence, arguing that the testimonies should not be considered reliable, particularly regarding the possession of stolen items.

Errors Assigned by the Appellant

The appellant raised two main errors in his appeal:

  1. The trial court erred in finding him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of robbery with multiple homicide.
  2. Even if found guilty, the court erroneously imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count.

Legal Findings on Robbery and Homicide

The court addressed the legal definition of robbery with homicide, clarifying that the designation as robbery with multiple homicide was inaccurate. It determined that for such a conviction, the original intent must be robbery, which was not sufficiently established. The evidence pointed to a lack of prior criminal intent to steal, indicating that the taking of property occurred as an afterthought to the homicides.

Sufficient Circumstantial Evidence

While there were no eyewitnesses to the actual killings, the court acknowledged that circumstantial evidence could support a conviction. It concluded that multiple witnesses corroborated the appellant's presence, actions, and the retrieval of stolen items from his possession. The court ruled that the appellant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for his possession of the property, leading to an inference of guilt.

Final Ruling and Modifications

The court modified the trial court's decision, convicting the appe

...continue reading

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