Bea Germaine Unas Class Student No.

44

Criminal Law 2; RPC-Art.294; Robbery with violence against persons

People vs. Yabut, 226 SCRA 715 [G.R. No. 85472], (Sept. 27, 1993)

FACTS:

The two accused, Angeles San Antonio and Eriberto Yabut, arrived at General Santiago’s house
as they were looking for the family driver. To the maids’ surprise, they saw guns pointed at them, a .45
caliber pistol by San Antonio and an armalite by Yabut. The two accused announced a robbery then they
rounded up the people inside the house. The two got the amount of P800.00 and took several pieces of
jewelry with a total cost of P545,000.00. The two men had started to leave when San Antonio, as if by
afterthought, grabbed Yabut’s armalite and fired at their captives. Four people died on the spot while
the two others suffered physical injuries. At the trial, both San Antonio and Yabut admitted their
participation in the crime charged. Yabut, however, offered to enter a plea of guilty only to the lesser
offense of simple robbery, saying he had no part in the killings. San Antonio tried to exculpate himself
with the explanation that at the time of the commission of the offense, he was under the influence of
drugs. The trial court charged them with the crime of robbery with multiple homicide and serious
physical injuries.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not there is conspiracy.

2. Whether or not Yabut should also be guilty of homicide.

HELD:

1. Yes. Conspiracy may be inferred from the conduct of the accused before, during and after the
commission of the crime, showing that the several accused had acted in concert or in unison
with each other, evincing a common purpose or design. In the case at bar, the evidence shows
that Yabut and San Antonio were together when they borrowed the car they used to get the
armalite in Yabut’s house. San Antonio admitted they brought the armalite to Santiago’s
residence with robbery aforethought. Both San Antonio and Yabut, brandishing their weapons,
herded the occupants of the house into the library. Yabut ordered Bultron to tie the hands of
Santiago. While San Antonio was ransacking the rooms, Yabut stood guard with his armalite,
ready to react to any resistance on discovery. All these acts showed unity of purpose between
Yabut and San Antonio in the execution of the robbery and the killings and physical injuries that
followed.

2. Yes. The Court also applies the accepted principle that whenever homicide has been committed
as a consequence or on the occasion of the robbery, all those who took part as principals in the
robbery will also be held guilty as principals of the special crime of robbery with homicide
although they did not actually take part in the homicide. The single exception to the rule is when
it is clearly shown that they endeavored to prevent the unlawful killing. But there is no such
showing here. On the contrary, Yabut actually threatened the lives of the captives, saying he
would make “dominoes” out of them, by which he meant he would mow them down one after
the other.