[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
187 views2 pages

Robbery with Homicide Conviction Ruling

Rodel Crisostomo was implicated in an armed robbery and murder that occurred at a gasoline station. Three armed men arrived by motorcycle, with two entering the station while the third remained outside. One man fired a shot killing the cashier as they took money from the register. Crisostomo and another employee later identified him as one of the robbers. The court ruled that Crisostomo was guilty of robbery with homicide. It found that the overriding intention was to rob the station, and the killing was incidental. The court also found evidence of conspiracy as the crime was carried out in a concerted manner, making all participants guilty of robbery with homicide regardless of who fired the shot.

Uploaded by

learning
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
187 views2 pages

Robbery with Homicide Conviction Ruling

Rodel Crisostomo was implicated in an armed robbery and murder that occurred at a gasoline station. Three armed men arrived by motorcycle, with two entering the station while the third remained outside. One man fired a shot killing the cashier as they took money from the register. Crisostomo and another employee later identified him as one of the robbers. The court ruled that Crisostomo was guilty of robbery with homicide. It found that the overriding intention was to rob the station, and the killing was incidental. The court also found evidence of conspiracy as the crime was carried out in a concerted manner, making all participants guilty of robbery with homicide regardless of who fired the shot.

Uploaded by

learning
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Rodel Crisostomo vs. People, G.R. No. 171526, Sept.

1, 2010
Del Castillo, J.

Facts: Rodelio was working at a gasoline station owned by Jose at Buliran, San Miguel, Bulacan.
He was by the gasoline tank which was two or three arm’s length from the cashiers office
when three armed men on board a motorcycle arrived. Two of the men immediately went to
the cashier while the driver stayed on the motorcycle. Inside the office, one of the men pulled
out a fan knife while the other, armed with a gun, fired a shot at Janet Ramos (Janet), the
cashier. They forcibly took the money in the cash register and the man with the gun fired a
second shot that fatally hit Janet in the right side of her head. The two armed men returned to
their companion waiting by the motorcycle and together sped away from the scene of the
crime. The petitioner was detained after being implicated in a robbery that occurred in San
Miguel, Bulacan. During his detention, Rodelio and another gasoline boy arrived and identified
him in a police lineup as one of the three robbers who killed Janet.
Issue: WON accused is guilty of the complex crime of robbery with homicide?
Ruling: Yes. Robbery with homicide exists when a homicide is committed either by reason, or
on occasion, of the robbery. To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide, the
prosecution must prove the following elements: (1) the taking of personal property belonging
to another; (2) with intent to gain; (3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person;
and (4) on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as used in its
generic sense, was committed. A conviction requires certitude that the robbery is the main
purpose and objective of the malefactor and the killing is merely incidental to the robbery. The
intent to rob must precede the taking of human life but the killing may occur before, during
or after the robbery. From the foregoing, it is clear that the overriding intention of the
petitioner and his cohorts was to rob the gasoline station. The killing was merely incidental,
resulting by reason or on occasion of the robbery.
Issue: Was there conspiracy?
Ruling: Yes. The concerted manner [in which the petitioner and his] companions perpetrated
the crime showed beyond reasonable doubt the presence of conspiracy. Where conspiracy is
established, it matters not who among the accused actually shot and killed the victim. The
consistent doctrinal rule is that when a homicide takes place by reason or on the occasion of
the robbery, all those who took part shall be guilty of the special complex crime of robbery
with homicide whether or not they actually participated in the killing, unless there is proof that
they had endeavored to prevent the killing.

You might also like