G.R. No. 4365. August 25, 1908
THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. FERNANDO ESTABILLO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
TRACEY, J.:
In the face of the specific relation of the two surviving victims, Agan and Galves, the pretense of the accused that he was present at the robbery and murder under compulsion, having been summoned by the robbers from his house to act as their guide, can not be credited.
This is a case where the murder was perpetrated at a place different from that of the robbery and after an appreciable interval of time. Yet, both transactions being part of the general plan and, the object of the murders being in furtherance of the robbery, by doing away with the witnesses to it, the entire transaction is considered as constituting the crime of robbery with homicide. (U. S. vs. Palmadres, 7 Phil Rep., 120; U. S. vs. Macalalad, 9 Phil. Rep., 1.)
It appears from the testimony that each of the robbers dealt only with his particular victim, so that this accused did not assault either of the men who died. Nevertheless, the murders having been in furtherance of the common plan, in which he participated, he is responsible for them. (U. S. vs. Santos, 4 Phil. Rep., 189.)
The court below rightly considered as aggravating circumstances that the crime had been committed in an uninhabited place by a gang of men, with alevosia, and without any extenuating circumstances, and condemned the accused to death, with indemnity of P500 to the heirs of Pablo Garcia and Gaspar Marquez, together with the costs. This judgment is affirmed, with the costs of this instance. So ordered.
Arellano, C. J., Torres, Mapa, Carson, and Willard, JJ., concur.