G.R. Nos. 53926-29. November 13, 1989
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MANUEL MATEO, JR., ESMERALDO CRUZ, EMMANUEL CAGANAP, GENER FILOTEO, MANUEL MENDOZA, ROLANDO REYES, DANNY TOSCO, RENATO MENDOZA…
PADILLA, J.:
For having allegedly robbed the American Express Bank Branch
located inside the United States Naval Base in Sangley
Point, Cavite City and killed a U.S. marine officer
on the occasion thereof, Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo
Cruz, Roberto Martinez @ Ruben Martinez, and Enrique Concepcion,
members of the Cavite City police department, and
Emmanuel Caganap, Gener Filoteo, Manuel Mendoza, Rolando Reyes, Danny Tosco, Renato Mendoza, Melanio Mendoza,
and seven (7) persons whose identities have remained unknown, were charged
before the Circuit Criminal Court of Pasig, Rizal, with the crime of Robbery in Band with Homicide, and
three (3) separate crimes of Robbery in Band, docketed therein as
CCC-VII-843-Cavite City to CCC-VII-846-Cavite City, inclusive, committed as
follows:
1. CCC-VII-843-Cavite City:
“That on or about the 4th day of June, 1971, in Cavite City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring and confederating and
helping one another, and with intent of gain and against the will of the owner
thereof, armed with firearms, by means of force, violence, and intimidation
did, then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously rob, take and carry away from the American Express Bank Branch, a
private firm duly represented by Antonio Laforteza,
resident special agent, of the amount of $41,120.79 and P96,532.38, to the
damage and prejudice of the latter in the aforesaid amount of $41,120.79 and
P96,532.38; that as a consequence of an encounter during said Robbery in Band,
the person of First Lt. James Plumpowski, USMC, who
at that time responded to the alarm flashed by the bank personnel, sustained
serious wounds on the vital parts of his body which caused his death.
“The aggravating circumstances attendant thereto are the
following:
“1. Use of Motor Vehicle;
2. Taking advantage of superior strength;
3. Committed in band, all being armed;
4. Committed with the aid of persons who insure
or afford impunity;
5. Committed with evident premeditation; and
6. That craft, fraud, or disguise was
employed.”[1]
2. CCC-VII-844-Cavite City:
“That on or about the 4th day of June 1971, in Cavite City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring and confederating and
helping one another, with intent of gain and against the will of the owner
thereof, armed with firearms, by means of force, violence and intimidation, did
then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously
rob, take and carry away from Antonio Araquel, the
following articles, to wit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to the damage
and prejudice of the latter in the aforementioned amount of P86.00.
“The aggravating
circumstances attendant thereto are the following:
1. Use of motor vehicle;
2. Taking advantage of superior strength;
3. Committed in band, all being armed;
4. Committed with the aid of persons who insure
or afford impunity;
5. That craft, fraud or disguise was employed.”[2]
3. CCC-VII-845-Cavite City:
That on or about the 4th day of June 1971, in Noveleta,
Province of Cavite, Philippines and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused conspiring and
confederating and helping one another, with intent of gain and against the will
of the owner thereof, armed with firearms, by means of force, violence and
intimidation did, then and there wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously rob, take and carry away from the Aguinaldo
Development Corporation (Goody-Goody Bakery), a delivery truck with Plate No.
42-24xx, Manila 1971, valued at $1,500.00 which Aguinaldo
Development Corporation is duly represented by Atty. Carlos, to the damage and
prejudice of the latter corporation in the aforeamount
of $1,500.00
“The aggravating circumstances attendant thereto are the
following:
1. Use of Motor Vehicle;
2. Taking advantage of superior strength;
3. Committed in band, all being armed;
4. Committed with the aid of persons who insure
or afford impunity;
5. Committed with evident premeditation; and
6. That craft, fraud or disguise was
employed.”[3]
4. CCC-Vll-846-Cavite City:
“That on or about the
4th day of June, 1971, in Cavite City, Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused
conspiring and confederating and helping one another, with intent of gain and
against the will of the owner thereof, armed with firearms, by means of force,
violence and intimidation did, then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously rob, take and carry away from Rodrigo Estrebillo his Driver’s License valued at P6.00, to the
damage and prejudice of the afore-said driver in the amount of P6.00.
“The aggravating circumstances attendant thereto are the following:
1. Use of Motor Vehicle;
2. Taking advantage of superior strength;
3. Committed in Band, all being armed
4. Committed with the aid of persons who insure
or afford impunity; and
5. That craft, fraud or disguise was
employed.”[4]
When arraigned, the accused entered pleas of NOT GUILTY, except
for Emmanuel Caganap who pleaded GUILTY to the
charges and was accordingly sentenced, in Crim. Case
No. CCC-Vll-843-Cavite City, to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Lt.
James Plumpowski in the amount of P12,000.00; to pay
the American Express Bank Branch, thru Antonio Laforteza,
the amounts of $41,120.79 and P96,532.38; to pay the amount of P10,000.00 as
moral damages and another P10,000.00 as
exemplary damages, and to pay the costs; and in CCC-Vll-844-Cavite City,
CCC-Vll-845-Cavite City and CCC-Vll-846-Cavite City, to suffer the penalty of
from two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of prision
correccional, as minimum, to four (4) years
and two (2) months of prision correccional, as maximum, in each of the aforestated cases; and to indemnify the complainants
Antonio Araquel, in the amount of P86.00; the Aguinaldo Development Corporation, in the amount of $1,500.00;
and Rodrigo Estrebillo, in the amount of P6.00; and
to pay the costs.[5]
The accused Rolando Reyes subsequently withdrew his plea of NOT
GUILTY and pleaded GUILTY to the charges.
He was consequently sentenced, in Crim. Case
No. CCC-VII-843Cavite City, to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Lt.
James Plumpowski in the amount of P12,000.00; to pay the American Express Bank Branch, thru
Antonio Laforteza, the amounts of $41,120.79 and
P96,532.38; to pay the amount of P10,000.00 as moral damages and another P10,000.00
as exemplary damages; and to pay the costs; and in Crim.
Cases Nos. CCC-VII-844-Cavite City, CCC-VII-845-Cavite City and
CCC-VII-846-Cavite City, to suffer the penalty of from two (2) years, four (4)
months and one (1) day of prision correccional, as minimum, to four (4) years and two
(2) months of prision correccional,
as maximum, in each of the aforesaid
cases; and to indemnify the complainants Antonio Araquel,
in the amount of P86.00, the Aguinaldo Development
Corporation, in the amount of $1,500.00, and Rodrigo EstrebiIIo,
in the amount of P6.00; and to pay the costs.[6]
On 5 November 1973,
upon motion of the City Fiscal, the charges against the accused Manuel Mendoza
were dismissed.[7]
After a joint trial of the cases and an assessment of the
evidence presented by the parties, judgment was rendered by the court a quo
on 5 November 1979, as
follows:
“WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. CCC-VII-843-Cavite City, the
Court finds the accused Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo
Cruz, Gener Filoteo, Renato Mendoza, Melanio Mendoza,
Roberto Martinez @ Ruben Martinez and Enrique Concepcion
GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Robbery in Band with Homicide,
as defined in paragraph 1, Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code, as charged in
the Amended Information; and the Court hereby sentences aII
of the said accused to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA, with accessory
penalties prescribed by law; ordering them to indemnify jointly and severally
the heirs of the offended party, Lt. James Plumpowski,
in the amount of Twelve Thousand Pesos (P12,000.00); ordering them to pay
jointly and severally the American Express Bank Branch, thru Antonio Laforteza, the amount of Forty-one Thousand One Hundred
Twenty Dollars and Seventy-nine Cents ($41,120.79), or its equivalent in
Philippine Currency, and the amount of Ninety-six Thousand Five Hundred
Thirty-two Pesos and Thirty-eight Centavos (P96,532.38); and to pay their
proportionate share of the costs.
“In Criminal Case No.
CCC-VII-844-Cavite City, the Court finds the accused Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo Cruz, Gener Filoteo, Renato Mendoza, Melanio Mendoza, Roberto Martinez @ Ruben Martinez, and
Enrique Concepcion GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime of Robbery in Band, as defined in paragraph 5, Article 294 of the
Revised Penal Code, as charged in the Amended Information; and the Court hereby
sentences aII of the said accused to suffer
imprisonment of FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO (2) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY, as minimum, to
SIX (6) YEARS, as maximum, with accessory penalties prescribed by law;
ordering them to indemnify jointly and severally the offended party, Antonio Araquel, in the amount of Eighty-six Pesos (P86.00); and to
pay their proportionate share of the costs.
“In Criminal Case No.
CCC-VII-845-Cavite City, the Court finds the accused Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo Cruz, Gener Filoteo, Renato Mendoza, Melanio Mendoza, Roberto Martinez @ Ruben Martinez, and
Enrique Concepcion GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime of Robbery in Band, as defined in paragraph 5, Article 294 of the
Revised Penal Code, as charged in the Amended Information; and the Court hereby
sentences all of the said accused to suffer imprisonment of FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO
(2) MONTHS, and ONE (1) DAY, as minimum, to SIX (6) YEARS, as maximum, with
accessory penalties prescribed by law; and to pay their proportionate share of
the costs.
“In Criminal Case No.
CCC-VII-846-Cavite City, the Court finds the accused Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo Cruz, Gener Filoteo, Renato Mendoza, Melanio Mendoza, Roberto Martinez @ Ruben Martinez, and
Enrique Concepcion GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime of Robbery in Band, as defined in paragraph 5, Article 294 of the
Revised Penal Code, as charged in the Amended Information, and the Court hereby
sentences all of the said accused to suffer imprisonment of FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO
(2) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY, as minimum, to SIX (6) YEARS, as maximum, with
accessory penalties prescribed by law; ordering them to indemnify jointly and
severally the offended party, Rodrigo Estrebillo, in
the amount of Six Pesos (P6.00); and to pay their proportionate share of the
costs.
“In the service of the sentence, all of the said accused are entitled to Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended
by Republic Act No. 6127.
“As regards the accused Danilo Tosco
@ Danny Tosco, this Court finds the evidence against him insufficient to
warrant his conviction beyond reasonable doubt for all the crimes charged in
Criminal Cases Nos. CCC-VII-843, 844, 845 and 846-Cavite, and hereby ACQUITS
said accused.”[8]
From this judgment, the accused Manuel Mateo, Jr., Esmeraldo Cruz, and Enrique Concepcion
appealed. Manuel Mateo, Jr. and Esmeraldo Cruz, however, subsequently withdrew their
appeals.[9]
The incriminatory facts of these cases, as contained in the
People’s Brief, are as follows:
“At about 4:45 o’clock in the morning of June 4, 1971, Rodrigo
Estrebillo was driving the Goody-Goody delivery truck
of the Aguinaldo, Inc., coming from its bakery at V. Mapa, Manila to deliver bread at the then U.S. Naval Base
at Sangley Point, Cavite
City. With Estrebillo
in the truck was Antonio Araquel a helper. At approximately 7:00 o’clock of the same morning of June 4, 1971, while the Goody-Goody truck was travelling at the Lido Beach Resort and upon reaching a
curve near Long Beach, a passenger
jeep with armed men on board suddenly cut across the way of the Goody-Goody
truck. Estrebillo
immediately stopped the truck. Three
armed men alighted from the jeep and one of them poked a gun at Estrebillo, shoved him to the side and took over the wheels
of the Goody-Goody truck. The second
armed man likewise poked a gun at Antonio Araquel and
ordered him to alight from the truck and to go inside the passenger jeep. The third man blindfolded Estrebillo
with an undershirt and sat in front of the truck sandwiching EstrebiIIo between him and the other armed man. Estrebillo
identified the armed man who poked a gun at him as Roberto or Ruben
Martinez. Araquel
identified the man who pointed a gun at him and ordered him to go to the
passenger jeep as Gener Filoteo. The man who took over the driver’s seat from Estrebillo was identified as Emmanuel Caganap. Thereafter, the passenger jeep proceeded to
Bay Court Hotel in Cavite
City near the police
checkpoint. Following the passenger jeep
was the Goody-Goody truck driven by Emmanuel Caganap.
“At the Bay Court Hotel, Estrebillo
and Araquel were brought inside a room. Estrebillo’s
blindfold was removed. Martinez
asked Araquel how to use the gate pass to enter Sangley Point and the latter informed Martinez
that the receipt for the bread should be stamped by a doctor before actual
delivery. Martinez
took the gate pass and the receipt for the bread from Araquel,
as weII as Estrebillo’s driver’s
license. Araquel
was stripped of his watch worth P50.00, shoes worth P20.00 and cash money of
P15.00. Estrebillo
and Araquel were warned by Martinez
that they would be killed and be seen floating in the sea should they tell
anyone what happened.
“Aside from Martinez
and Filoteo, who were identified by Estrebillo and Araquel, other
armed men were identified by Marilyn Tordecillas Orendain, wife of the Assistant Manager of the Bay Court
Hotel, Gin Moe alias Lee. Mrs. Orendain was at the hotel at 6:00
o’clock in the morning of June
4, 1971. She saw Roberto
Martinez and Enrique Concepcion arrive. She also saw Esmeraldo
Cruz come in when Martinez asked
for a drink. Concepcion sat in front of Mrs. Orendain a little away from the counter. At past seven
o’clock of the same morning, she saw a passenger jeep arrive with
armed men followed by a Goody-Goody truck.
The jeep parked near the second house in the house compound, while the
Goody-Goody truck went straight to the fourth house and then returned to the
second house where the jeep was parked.
Also among the group were Manuel Mateo, Jr., or
June Mateo, the brothers Melanio and Renato Mendoza, a certain Doming, Didong,
Lando and Eddie Mata.
“It was at the Bay Court Hotel where Martinez
spelled out the details of the plan to rob the American Express Bank inside Sangley Point. At
about 10:00 a.m., after Martinez
had acquired the necessary information as to how the entrance to the U.S. Naval
Base at Sangley Point could be effected, the
Goody-Goody truck, driven by Emmanuel Caganap, left
the Bay Court Hotel and proceeded to the base.
Beside Caganap in front of the truck was
Gender Filoteo.
Inside the truck were Rolando Reyes, Renato
and Melanio Mendoza, Doming and Didong. The rest of the group comprising Martinez,
Mateo, Cruz, Concepcion
and Eddie Mata rode in a jeep in going to Sangley
Point.
xxx xxx xxx
“Martinez also
gave out last-minute instructions. He
told the men in the Goody-Goody truck that his group composed of himself,
Mateo, Concepcion, Cruz, Eddie Mata and Lando, would be outside the base and would fire to confuse
the Americans. Martinez
further said that if there be any danger, hostages would have to be taken.
“And so, at about ten o’clock
in the morning of June 4, 1971,
in furtherance of the conspiracy, with Caganap
driving, with Filoteo beside him, and with Reyes, Melanio and Renato Mendoza,
Doming and Didong inside the Goody-Goody truck, the
group proceeded towards the American Express Bank inside Sangley
Point. While still away from the bank, Gener Filoteo and Renato Mendoza alighted from the Goody-Goody truck and
walked to the bank. On the pretext that
they were looking for the Administration
Building, they asked a U.S. Marine
on guard posted at the bank where the Administration
Building is located. However, the marine did not understand the
question, so he did not answer. Filoteo and Renato Mendoza then
asked a Filipino who was there at the moment, and the Filipino pointed to the Administration
Building. Filoteo and Mendoza
proceeded to cross the street towards the Administration
Building. At the moment, the Goody-Goody truck
arrived. Immediately, Filoteo and Mendoza returned to the bank pointed their guns
at the marine on guard, Para Guadalupe, handcuffed him at the railings of the
stairs in front of the bank and took the marine’s shotgun and radio. Almost simultaneously, the armed men inside
the Goody-Goody truck alighted and proceeded inside the bank. Filoteo and Renato Mendoza followed but not until after Filoteo had ordered two of the ‘cuadra‘
boys to stand guard outside the bank near the handcuffed marine, Para
Guadalupe. The latter, recognized from
the picture, Exhibit ‘G-3’, the man wearing a cap, and identified him as Gener Filoteo, as one of the two
armed men who approached him, handcuffed him and took his shotgun and
radio. According to him, the two armed
men standing outside the bank near the place where he was handcuffed,
fired shots in the air to scare people.
“Ismael Bob Pittman, a U.S.
marine assigned at the U.S. Naval Base, Sangley
Point, was inside the barracks when he heard the bank alarm. Responding to the alarm, Pittman and several
other U.S.
marines, among whom were Capt. Taylor, S/Sgt. Mc
Daniel, Sgt. Greene, Cpl. Mitchell, Pfc. Thompson, boarded a marine truck and
proceeded to the direction of the bank.
There was an exchange of gunfire between the marines and the armed men
in the bank. Pittman hid behind a tree,
but could not return fire as he left his firearm in the marine vehicle. In the ensuing gunbattle
Pittman and Para Guadalupe saw Lt. James Plumpowski
fatally shot.
“Inside the American Express Bank, the employees were
performing their usual duties. Helena Parcero was secretary and assistant vault custodian. Nicanor Obtera was senior teller and senior custodian of the
bank. Other employees were Lucila Santos, teller No. 5; Edgardo
Moncal, teller No. 2; and Angeling
Basto. The
Bank Manager, Robert Gilman, was in his office.
When the four or five armed men entered the bank, one of them shouted, ‘Everybody, do not move; this is a hold-up,’ and asked for
the Manager. Nicanor
Obtera pointed to the Bank Manager, who came out from
his office. Upon orders from the armed
men, Gilman told Obtera to open the vault. Obtera and Parcero then opened the vault, with two armed men behind
them. After the two safes in the vault
were opened, the armed man holding a sack ordered Obtera
and Parcero to take the pesos from one safe and the
dollars from the other safe and to place them in the sack.
“During the shooting that ensued, the man armed with a rifle
was hit in the head. The bleeding man
sat near the grill door of the vault, took off his shirt and tied it around his
head. This man was identified as Renato Mendoza.
Another gunman was shot and who was later identified as Emmanuel Caganap. One of the
gunmen, known as Doming, was killed.
“Meanwhile, Daniel Luchyz, a U.S. navyman who was standing in front of the American Express
Bank at the time the Goody-Goody truck passed, was ordered by the armed man
carrying a rifle to go inside the bank, and there he was told by the man
carrying .45 caliber pistol and with a gun slung across his shoulder, to carry
the sack of money outside the bank. The
other armed men took hostages with them, rushed out of the bank towards a
parked marine truck, boarded the vehicle, sped towards the west gate and made
their exit at the portion of the gate where the wire fence was cut two days
before the incident. A group of armed men
waited outside the fence for their companions and they all made their escape
with the bank loot.
“Almost at the same time that the bank heist was happening,
another scene was transpiring at the main gate of the U.S. Naval Base at Sangley Point. John
L. Tori, Jr. a U.S.
marine stationed at Sangley Point,
was at the main gate of the base at about ten
o’clock in the morning of June
4, 1971 with his wife Joselita Tori to shop at the base commissary. When he heard the alarm, he went back to the
gate to close it. Tori
heard four shots outside the gate and saw a woman running towards the
gate. Tori
also saw a man running towards Post No. 3 holding and firing a .45 caliber
pistol. Tori
identified him as Manuel Mateo Jr., Tori also saw
another armed man who fired his weapon.
A jeep with motor still running was parked outside the fence of the base
about a yard from the tower post. Tori identified Esmeraldo Cruz as
the one seated inside the jeep with another man with his back turned. After helping to safety a woman and a child
inside the gate, Tori ran towards Post No. 3, where
marine Elliot J. Grey was on guard duty, positioned at the tower located at the
fence along the street.
“Elliot saw a jeep pass the tower three times and at the
fourth time, the jeep pulled off in a corner and two men got out of the jeep,
who started firing inside the base, one with .45 caliber pistol and the other
with a Thompson submachinegun. As the two men fired, they ran down the
street behind the jeep which turned to the corner. Elliot then got out of the tower and ran to
the main gate, met Tori and helped move people for
cover. About two to three minutes after
the men fired from outside the base, Elliot heard firing from the direction of
the American Express Bank. Elliot proceeded
to the bank and had an argument with the wife of the Bank Manager, who wanted
to go to the bank to see her husband, but Elliot brought her to safety inside a
house. Elliot identified Mateo as the
gunman who fired the .45 caliber pistol and Martinez
as the man who fired the Thompson submachinegun.
“Merle Dyer is a journalist of the U.S. Navy, Subic Naval Base. On
June 4 1971, he was assigned
to the U.S. Naval Base at Sangley Point as a
photographer. Dyer had no actual
knowledge that a robbery was being committed at the American Express Bank, but
he had a feeling that something was happening from what he saw and heard. He loaded 20 films in his Nikkon
35mm camera, with 105 mm. lens. He
positioned himself at the glass of the window in an office about 75 meters away
from the scene. In kneeling position,
Dyer took several pictures, using 19 of the 20 films in his camera. The films were processed by a technician and
photograph officer at the base laboratory.
While the films were being processed, Dyer was outside the door of the
laboratory. Among the films developed,
the following are the significant ones:
“Exhibit ‘C’ depicts an American holding a gun crouched near a
panel truck. In the background is the
building housing the American Express Bank inside the U.S. Naval Base at Sangley Point. Exhibit ‘C-1-a’
depicts an armed man in prone position near a tree with a motorcycle
nearby. Exhibit ‘C-2-a’ shows an armed
man emerging from the bank building which is a sequence to Exhibit ‘C-1’. Exhibit ‘C-3-a’ shows a dead man near a tree,
one of the armed robbers. Exhibit
‘C-4-a’ shows the American hostage, Daniel Luchyz,
carrying the sack of money and behind him is the gunman later identified as
accused Gener Filoteo. This is a sequence to Exhibit ‘C’. Exhibit ‘C-5’ is blow-up of Exhibit ‘C-4’ in
which the marine hostage Daniel Luchyz and the gunman
accused Gener Filoteo,
Exhibit ‘G-5-b’, are depicted. Exhibit
‘C-6’ shows another gunman herding hostages, Exhibit ‘C-6-a’. Exhibit ‘C-7’ shows accused Filoteo at the back of the American hostage Daniel Luchyz, Exhibit ‘C-7-b’ with Goody-Goody truck, Exhibit
‘C-7-a’, clearly visible. Exhibits
‘C-8’, ‘C-9’ and ‘C-10’ depict accused Renato Mendoza
with bandaged head at the back of the Manager of the American Express
Bank. Exhibit ‘C-11’ clearly shows
accused Gener Filoteo,
Exhibit ‘C-11-c’, pointing a gun at the American hostage Daniel Luchyz, Exhibit ‘C-11-b’, who was carrying the sack of
money near the Goody-Goody truck, Exhibit ‘C-11-a’. Exhibits ‘C-12’ and ‘C-13’ show accused Renato Mendoza with bandaged head, holding a gun behind the
Bank Manager with raised hands and the American hostage Daniel Luchyz. Exhibit ‘C-12-a-1’, Exhibit ‘C-13-b-1’, carrying the sack of money
near the Goody-Goody truck.
Exhibit ‘C-14’ clearly shows the accused Renato
Mendoza, with bandaged head behind Bank Managers Rolando Reyes, Exhibit
‘C-14-1’, and Melanio Mendoza, Exhibit ‘G-3’. Exhibits ‘C-15’ and ‘C-16’ show the persons
being herded by a gunman in front of the bank.
“Dr. William Hunter, Jr., a physician of the U.S. Naval
Command Institution at San Miguel Zambales was
working at the dispensary of the U.S. Naval Base at Sangley
Point on June 4, 1971. At about 10:50
a.m. the body of the slain Lt. James Plumpowski
was brought into the dispensary.
Together with two other doctors, Dr. Hunter examined the body of Lt. Plumpowski, found two large wounds on the left side of the
chest (Exhibits ‘B-1-a’ and ‘B-1-b’) and a smaII
wound on the left arm (Exhibit ‘B-1-c’).
The marine officer was dead on arrival at the dispensary (Exhibit ‘B’)
Cause of death was external and internal hemorrhage due to gunshot wounds.
“Meanwhile at the Bay Court Hotel where the armed group left
Rodrigo Estrebillo and Antonio Araquel,
driver and helper of the Goody-Goody truck, respectively, it was about 2:30 o’clock in the afternoon of June 4, 1971 that the two left the
hotel. They went towards the police
checkpoint in front thereof and boarded a Saulog bus
to Manila. Stopping at Baclaran,
Etrebillo and Araquel took
the JD transit bound for Monumento, alighting at Mandaluyong and from there proceeded towards Quiapo dropping at the Aguinaldo,
Inc. office at V. Mapa, Manila. After Estrebillo
reported the incident, he was accompanied to the NBI office by Atty. Fernandez,
lawyer of the Aguinaldo, Inc., and there Estrebillo narrated what happened to him and Antonio Araquel. Atty.
Rogelio M. Carlos, Assistant Chief Legal Counsel of the Aguinaldo,
Inc., identified the Goody-Goody truck as one of the properties of the Aguinaldo, Inc. (Exhibits ‘H’ and ‘H-1’) valued at
$1,500.00 (Exhibit ‘H-2’). Incidentally,
the Goody-Goody truck was released to its owner on July 5, 1971 by the Cavite PC
Command at Imus, Cavite.
“After the robbery, Antonio Laforteza,
agent of the American Express Company, conducted an investigation on June 4, 1971, together with the
company travelling auditor. The investigation revealed that the loss
sustained by the American Express Bank as a result of the armed robbery
amounted to P96,532.38 and $41,120.79 (Exhibit ‘M’).
“Immediately after the robbery of the American Express Bank,
PC forces under Col. Daniel G. Lira, PC Cavite
Provincial Commander, captured Emmanuel Caganap, one
of the wounded gunmen, in a house in Cavite City. Interviewed by M/Sgt. Prospero B. Gapas of the Cavite PC Command, Caganap confessed and admitted his participation in the Sangley Point holdup and named as his companions, Ruben
Martinez, Enrique Concepcion, Manuel Mateo, Jr.,
Rolando Reyes, and Renato Mendoza. Caganap also stated
in the interview which was reduced into writing by Sgt. Gapas
(Exhibit ‘A’) that Ruben Martinez supplied them with three .45 caliber pistols,
two carbines, and three M-16 armalites.
“At about 5:30 p.m.
of the same day, June 4, 1971,
the military authorities under Col. Lira received information that Martinez,
Concepcion
and Mateo were at the residence of Fiscal Dante Filoteo
at 535 Guzman Street, Caridad, Cavite City. The house was cordoned and guarded to prevent
escape. At 6:00
p.m., Col. Lira met Fiscal Filoteo two or
three blocks away from his house. Fiscal
Filoteo was informed that the three suspects in the
robbery (Martinez, Concepcion and Mateo) were in his
house and that he should help facilitate their surrender, but Fiscal Filoteo refused. At
about 8:00 p.m., Col. Lira met Mayor Dones of Cavite
City, Governor Montano and Fiscal Filoteo at the Pagoda Restaurant. Montano and Dones
joined in convincing Filoteo to help in the surrender
of the three suspects. Again Filoteo declined and said he was afraid to go to his house
because there might be shooting.
Finally, at one o’clock in the
morning of June 5, 1971 when
Fiscal Filoteo learned that the Chief of the
Philippine Constabulary would not countermand Col. Lira’s order, Fiscal Filoteo relented and accompanied by Police Chief Del
Rosario of the Cavite City Police, Fiscal Filoteo went to his house.
Thereafter, Fiscal Filoteo came out with Martinez,
Mateo and Concepcion. Confiscated were an armalite
from Concepcion
(Exhibit ‘0-1’) and a carbine from Martinez
(Exhibit ‘0-2’). The three suspects were
brought to Camp Crame immediately for
investigation. However, only Martinez
gave a statement (Exhibit ‘U’), while Mateo and Concepcion refused.
“On September 30,
1971, elements of the PC-CIS arrested Rolando Reyes in barrio Pugad, Hagonoy, Bulacan. Taken to
the CIS office at Camp Crame, Reyes was investigated
by T/Sgt. Marcial Admana on
October 1, 1971 in the
presence of CIS Senior Agent Berlin Castillo and Investigating Agent Cesar Catibog. In an
extra-judicial confession (Exhibit ‘P’), Rolando Reyes narrated in detail the
circumstances surrounding the bank robbery in Sangley
Point, Cavite
City and he named his co-accused
herein as participants in the said robbery.
“On December 9, 1972,
Gener Filoteo was arrested
by CIS agents in his place of work in Cavite City. On December
11, 1972, he gave a statement to the CIS before Sgt. Jacinto Astrero which corroborated in substantial detail the
confession of Rolando Reyes. Filoteo’s extrajudicial confession appears in Exhibit ‘Q’,
‘Q-1’ to ‘Q-7’ and identified himself, Rolando Reyes, Renato
and Melanio Mendoza in the pictures (Exhibits ‘Q-8’
and ‘Q-9’).
“On December 16,
1972, the brothers Renato and Melanio Mendoza, accompanied by their mother and former
Vice-Mayor of Imus Francisco Herrera, went to see
Gen. Cicero Campos at U.P. Village
to surrender. As Gen. Campos was not at
home, they were told by an aid to proceed to the CIS at Camp
Crame. Before Sgt. Astrero,
Melanio Mendoza executed an extra?judicial
confession (Exhibits ‘R’, ‘R-1’, ‘R-3’), describing in detail the armed robbery
at the American Express Bank at Sangley Point on June
4, 1971. Melanio
Mendoza corroborated in material points the confession of Rolando Reyes and Gener Filoteo. On the other hand, Renato
Mendoza executed and signed a statement (Exhibits ‘S’ and ‘S-1’) affirming the
truth of his brother Melanio’s confession.”[10]
The appellant, Enrique Concepcion,
denied having participated in the commission of the crimes charged and interposed
the defense of alibi. The trial court
summarized his evidence, as follows:
“Accused Enrique Concepcion was a
police sergeant of Cavite
City on June 4, 1971, in-charge of the mobile patrol with
tour of duty from 8:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m.
According to Concepcion,
he went home after his tour of duty was finished, took his snack, and was about
to sleep when policeman Esmeraldo Cruz arrived at
about past 5:00 a.m. Cruz told him that Vice-Mayor Eduardo de
Guzman would like to talk to him about the suspected killer of the brother of
the Vice-Mayor. Concepcion told Cruz that he would
follow. Cruz rode in the mobile car,
while Concepcion
took his jeep.
At Salem Restaurant
Concepcion
talked to Vice-Mayor De Guzman who told him to go to the checkpoint to prevent
the escape of the killer of his brother.
It was past 5:00 a.m. when Concepcion and Cruz left the restaurant. Cruz parked the mobile car at his house and
rode with Concepcion
in the latter’s service jeep to the check-point, arriving there at 6:00 a.m.
Cpl. Felix Tiongco was at the
checkpoint. Tiongco
asked Concepcion and Cruz why they came and he was
told that Vice-Mayor De Guzman ordered them to be on the look-out for the
killer of the Vice-Mayor’s brother, a certain Roberto Javitan. Pat Manuel Mateo, Jr., also arrived at the
checkpoint. At about 9:30 a.m., Cpl. Tiongco
received a call from the Vice-Mayor and he told him that Concepcion
and Cruz may go home already. Tiongco relayed the message of the Vice-Mayor to Concepcion and Cruz.
At the same moment, a spare-parts dealer from Pasay City,
Benigno Medina, arrived at the checkpoint in a jeep
containing spare parts for a jeep that Concepcion
was then assembling. Medina
met Concepcion
at the checkpoint and they went together in Medina’s
jeep to Concepcion‘s house at Makisig
Street, San Antonio, Cavite City,
to deliver the spare parts. After
unloading the spare parts, while Concepcion
and Medina were having snack, Concepcion‘s
wife arrived from the market at about 11:00 a.m. She told Concepcion that there was a
robbery at Sangley Point. Immediately, Concepcion went to the police
headquarters taking Medina’s
jeep. He carried with him an armalite and a .38 Cal.
revolver. Concepcion
asked the Desk Officer Pfc. Virgilio Salazar (now
dead) about the Sangley Point incident, and he was
told by Salazar that he was a suspect with a shoot-to-kill order for him and
that he better see the Police Chief Del Rosario.
Concepcion, went to Del Rosario’s residence and was waiting for more
than an hour, when Fiscal Dante Filoteo arrived. Concepcion
told Fiscal Filoteo that he was a suspect in the Sangley Point case and that there was a shoot-to-kiII order for him by the PC. Filoteo told Concepcion that he would contact
the PC Commander about it. Concepcion stayed until about 1:00 p.m. at the house of the Chief of Police,
but he left when the Police Department called the Chief’s house that he could
not come home. Concepcion then proceeded to
Fiscal Filoteo’s house. At about 2:00 p.m., Mateo and Martinez
arrived at the Fiscal’s house and told Concepcion that they too were suspects in the Sangley Point robbery; that they also went to the residence
of Chief of Police, but did not see him; that they were told that Concepcion went to the residence of Fiscal Filoteo; and that they followed to seek the aid of the
Fiscal to surrender.
At past midnight of June 5, 1971, Fiscal Filoteo arrived at his house, which was then surrounded by
soldiers. Concepcion recognized Fiscal Filoteo and told him to come in. Filoteo led the
three – Concepcion, Martinez
and Mateo – outside and surrendered them to Col. Lira, the Provincial
Commander. According to Concepcion, a .38 caliber revolver
was grabbed from his waist by a PC soldier.
No receipt was issued to him for the revolver because according to him,
there was a commotion when the PC Soldiers disarmed Fiscal Filoteo
of his firearm. At past 1:00 a.m., Concepcion, Martinez
and Mateo were brought to the CIS, Camp
Crame,
where they were investigated and charged with illegal possession of firearms. However, they were acquitted of the offense
(Exhibit ‘3-Concepcion’).”[11]
This appeal involves the determination of the question of whether
or not the accused-appellant Enrique Concepcion
conspired with his co-accused in the commission of the crimes charged. Counsel for the appellant contends that there
is no iota of proof that the appellant actually participated in the commission
of the offenses charged and/or in the furtherance of a conspiracy to rob the American
Express Bank at the U.S. Naval Base in Sangley Point,
Cavite.
The contention is devoid of merit. Conspiracy need not be proved by direct
evidence. It need not be shown that the
parties actually came together and agreed in express terms to enter into and
pursue a common design. The assent of
the minds may be and, from the secrecy of the crime, usually inferred from
proof of facts and circumstances which, taken together, indicate that they are
parts of some complete whole. If it is
proved that two or more persons aimed, by their acts, at the accomplishment of
the same unlawful object, each doing a part so that their acts, though
apparently independent, were in fact connected and cooperative, indicating a
closeness of personal association and a concurrence of sentiment, a conspiracy
may be inferred though no actual meeting among them to concert ways and means
is proved.[12]
In the instant cases, the accused Emmanuel Caganap,
Rolando Reyes, Gener Filoteo,
Melanio Mendoza and Renato
Mendoza stated in their extra-judicial confessions given to PC investigators
soon after their arrest,[13]
that the appellant, Enrique Concepcion, was their
companion in robbing the American Express Bank Branch in the U.S. Naval Base in
Sangley Point on 4 June 1971.
Rolando Reyes and Gener Filoteo
also stated that the appellant was one of those who acted as
“look-outs” outside the base and waited for them outside the hole
they had previously made in the wire fence to facilitate their exit from the
naval base. Melanio
Mendoza and Gener Filoteo
further stated that they saw the appellant inside the Bay Court Hotel talking
to Ruben Martinez. These extra-judicial
confessions were given when the presumption of law was in favor of spontaneity
and voluntariness of a confession and it was
incumbent upon the accused to destroy that presumption;[14]
and yet, no evidence had been presented to overcome that presumption except the
retracting testimonies of Gener Filoteo,
Melanio Mendoza, and Renato
Mendoza to the effect that they did not give the implicatory
statements. However, the accused
Emmanuel Caganap and Rolando Reyes, who both pleaded
guilty, did not recant their statements.[15]
Besides, the recitals therein reflect spontaneity and coherence and are replete
with details that only the confessants could have known and supplied.
The appellant claims, however, that the said extra-judicial
confessions of his co-accused should not be taken against him following the
rule of res inter alios
acta.
The cited rule is not absolute.
In the case of People v. Ty Sui Wong,[16]
the Court said:
“Since People vs. Badilla,
the rule which has been reiterated by this Court in various cases is that
extrajudicial confessions, independently made without collusion, which are
identical with each other in their essential details and are corroborated by
other evidence on record, are admissible as circumstantial evidence against the
person implicated to show the probability of the latter’s actual participation
in the commission of the crime.
“Inasmuch as there is no proof of collusion among the declarants, their confessions should, therefore, be read
together to form a complete picture of the commission of the crime and
considered collectively as corroborative or confirmatory of the evidence apart
from the confessions themselves.”
There is no evidence of collusion and the extra-judicial
confessions of appellant’s co-accused are corroborated by Marilyn Tordecillas Orendain, wife of the
Assistant Manager of the Bay Court Hotel, who declared that she saw the
appellant, Enrique Concepcion, at a little past 6:00
o’clock in the morning of 4 June 1971 in the Bay Court Hotel together with the
accused Roberto Martinez and five (5) armed men who rode in a jeep and escorted
the Goody-Goody truck to the hotel premises and left the hotel together at
about 9:00 o’clock that morning.
Conspiracy can also be inferred from the fact that after the
commission of the robbery in the U.S. naval base, the accused-appeIIant and his co-accused, Manuel Mateo, Jr. and Roberto
Martinez, fled together to the house of Fiscal Dante Filoteo,
where they “holed out” until they were persuaded to surrender to the
authorities in the early morning of 5 June 1971.
Besides, the alibi of the appellant is not convincing. His claim that he was in his house at about
the time the robbery was perpetrated in Sangley
Point, Cavite,
looking over the spare parts which were delivered to him by one Benigno Medina, appears to be an afterthought. No record of the alleged transaction was
presented in court and the jeep he was supposed to assemble for one Danny Abarro could not be traced.
He reasoned that Abarro, who is now living
abroad, had allegedly sold the jeep to one Penny Lalana
who is now deceased.
The appellant’s claim that he went to the house of the chief of
police to seek protection after having been told by the desk sergeant that
there was a shoot-to-kill order out for him and that he then transferred to the
house of Fiscal Dante Filoteo in order to get the fiscal’s help in surrendering to the police authorities, is
incredible. To begin with, the desk
sergeant, one Salazar, who is now conveniently deceased, could not have told
the appellant at 11:00 o’clock in the morning of 4 June 1971 of an alleged
shoot-to-kill order as a result of the robbery in Sangley
Point, because his co-accused Emmanuel Caganap, who
implicated the appellant in the bank robbery, was investigated only at about
1:35 o’clock in the afternoon of 4 June 1971.
And, if his purpose in going to the house of Fiscal Dante Filoteo was to seek the latter’s help in order to
surrender, why did he not surrender to Fiscal Filoteo
earlier when they met at the house of the chief of police? Again, there was no point in going to Fiscal Filoteo in order to surrender when he was already at the
police station and all he had to do was to give up to the desk sergeant. It is unfortunate that the said desk sergeant
is already dead and cannot answer the appellant’s charge that he was remiss in
the performance of his duty to arrest the appeIIant,
pursuant to the shoot-to-kill order.
Moreover, the Court has held in a great number of cases that for
alibi to prosper, it is not enough to prove that the accused was somewhere else
when the crime was committed, but it must be also shown that it was physically
impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission.[17]
The appellant was in Cavite City
when the robbery was committed and his then proximity to the scene of the crime
does not rule out the possibility that he could be at the scene of the crime at
the time it was committed. In fact, the
trial court found that the “flimsiness of the defense of alibi is exposed by
the nearness of the accused to the scene of the crime.”[18]
The trial court found the appellant guilty of the crime of
Robbery in Band with Homicide. This is
not correct. In the case of People
vs. Pedroso,[19]
the Court said:
“x x x
There is no special complex crime of robbery in band with double homicide
and/or serious, less serious or slight physical injuries under the present
Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 373.
If robbery with homicide (or with the other crimes enumerated above) is
committed by a band, the indictable offence would still be denominated as
‘robbery with homicide’ under Article 294(1), but the circumstance that it was
committed by a band is not an element of the crime but is merely a generic
aggravating circumstance which may be offset by mitigating circumstances. The homicides or murders and physical
injuries, irrespective of their numbers, committed on the occasion or by
reason of the robbery are merged in the composite crime of ‘robbery with
homicide.’ x x x”
(Emphasis Supplied)
Accordingly, the appellant should be found guilty of the crime of
“Robbery with Homicide.” The penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the trial court is correct. But, the amount to be paid to the heirs of
the slain marine officer should be increased to P30,000.00
in line with the recent decisions of the Court.
We also find that the penalty imposed upon the appellant, Enrique
Concepcion, in Crim. Cases
Nos. CCC-VII-844, CCC-VII-845, and CCC-VII-846-Cavite City, is not in accord
with law. The penalty provided for the
offense under Article 294, No. 5, of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is prision correccional
in its maximum period to prision mayor
in its medium period, or from four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day to
ten (10) years. Applying the
Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum period to be imposed should be within
the range of the penalty next lower in degree, which is arresto
mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium period, or from four (4)
months and one (1) day to four (4) years and two (2) months. The minimum of the period imposed by the
trial court, which is four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day,
is obviously beyond the period provided for by law. It should be reduced accordingly.
With respect to the maximum period, there being two (2)
aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstance, the maximum of the
period, which is ten (10) years, should be imposed. The correct penalty to be imposed upon the
appellant, Enrique Concepcion, in each of the three
(3) aforementioned cases (CCC-VII-844, CCC-VII-845, CCC-VII-846-Cavite City)
should, therefore, be imprisonment of from four (4) years and two (2) months,
as minimum, to ten (10) years, as maximum.
WHEREFORE, with the modifications above-indicated, the
judgment appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED.
With costs.
SO ORDERED.
Paras, Sarmiento,
and Regalado, JJ., concur.
Melencio-Herrera, J., (Chairman), on leave.
[1]
Original Record of CCC-VII-843-Cavite City, p. 5
[2]
Original Record of CCC-VII-844-Cavite City, pp. 1-2
[3]
Original Record of CCC-VII-845-Cavite City, pp. 1-2
[4]
Original Record of CCC-VII-846-Cavite City, pp. 1-2
[5]
Original Record, p. 22
[6] Id.,
p. 659
[7] Id.,
p. 418
[8] Brief
for defendant-appellant, pp. 97-100, Rollo, p.
74
[9] Rollo, p. 85; Original Record, p. 1410
[10]
Brief of the appellee, pp. 5-20, Rollo,
p. 86
[11]
Brief for the appellee, pp. 21-24, Rollo, p. 86
[12]
People vs. Carbonell, 48 Phil. 868
[13] Exhibits
A, P, Q, R, and S
[14] People vs. Legaspi, G.R. Nos.
55103-04, August
18, 1988 164 SCRA 481, 488, citing People vs.
Garcia, 101 Phil. 616.
[15]
See tsn of July
12, 1971, pp. 6-27 and tsn of February 5, 1972, p. 11
[16] G.R. No. L-32529, May
12, 1978, 83 SCRA 125, 163
[17] People vs. Mercado, G.R. Nos. L-39511-13, April 28, 1980, 97 SCRA 232, 247
[18]
Brief for defendant-appellant, p. 86, Rollo,
p. 74
[19] G.R. No. L-32997, July
30, 1982, 115 SCRA 599, 608-609