Scribd
Upload
217 views

People VS Olazo

Charito Fernandez and several others planned to rob a married couple, Erlinda and Nicanor Vallecera, in their home. They enlisted the help of the couple's house helper to gain entry. During the robbery and homicide of Erlinda Vallecera, Charito was present and helped plan the crime. The court found Charito guilty based on testimony that he was involved before, during, and after the crime and that there was clear conspiracy between the perpetrators. The court also considered the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and abuse of superior strength. Charito was sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay damages to the victim's family.

Uploaded by

Kayee Kat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
217 views

People VS Olazo

Charito Fernandez and several others planned to rob a married couple, Erlinda and Nicanor Vallecera, in their home. They enlisted the help of the couple's house helper to gain entry. During the robbery and homicide of Erlinda Vallecera, Charito was present and helped plan the crime. The court found Charito guilty based on testimony that he was involved before, during, and after the crime and that there was clear conspiracy between the perpetrators. The court also considered the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and abuse of superior strength. Charito was sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay damages to the victim's family.

Uploaded by

Kayee Kat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDDIE OLAZO, MIGUEL CORDIS,


CHARITO FERNANDEZ AND ROGELIO LASCONIA, Accused,
CHARITO FERNANDEZ, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 220761, October 03, 2016

FACTS:

Accused Rogelio Lasconia together with several others plan to rob the spouses Erlinda and
Nicanor Vallecera inside their home in Abuyog, Leyte.
Dionesia Lasconia, the stay-out house helper of the spouses, also agreed that she would
assist them by helping them get access inside the house without being detected.

During their 1st and 2nd meeting, the plan did not push through because of some superstitious
omen and the absence of some of the expected members.

August 8, 2004, the group informed Dionesia that they would push through with their plan
that night. Therefore, Dionesia returned to the house of the spouses in the afternoon and
awaited for the arrival of the group.

Upon her arrival at the residence, Dionesia tended to her usual chores, and as agreed, she
left the back gate open to allow her co-accused to enter the compound.

Around seven o'clock in the evening, When Dionesia heard sounds near the back portion
of the house, she immediately opened the kitchen door and allowed the accused to enter
the house. All of them were wearing masks,

When Erlinda Vallecera opened the master's bedroom door, she was immediately accosted
by the three intruders. Eddie pointed a gun at her and grabbed her, covered her face.

Rogelio whispered at Erlinda not to make any noise as they were only there to get money.
They then dragged her into the master's bedroom where they then hogtied Nicanor
Vallecera.
After forcing Erlinda to open the vault, the took cash amounting to more than 100K and jewelry.
They brought Erlinda into the comfort room, then there Rommel slashed her throat using the samurai they
found inside Erlinda’s office. Thinking that Erlinda was still alive, Rogelio stabbed her several times which
cause her death.

Thereafter, to make it appear that Dionesia had no part in the robbery ,the three accused
hogtied her and then left the house.

They were charged with the crime of Robbery with Homicide

During arraignment
- Rommel Escobio pleaded guilty (slashed neck)
- Eddie Fernandez remained at large (pointed a gun at the victim)
During trial
- Joseph was discharged as state witness (the alleged driver of the motorcycle used
to transport the accused to and from the scene of the crime)
- Dionesia Lasconia was allowed to plead guilty to the lesser offense of Homicide on
the condition that she would corroborate the testimony of Joseph,
Ruling of the RTC
the RTC convicted :
Charito,
- Rogelio Lasconia, (stabbed Erlinda)
- Eddie Olazo,
- Miguel Corbis,
of the crime charged.

Charito along with Eddie Olazo and Miguel Corbis appealed before the CA,
Ruling of the CA
- the CA affirmed the RTC insofar as it convicted Charito of the crime charged.
BECAUSE his act of planning with the other accused the conduct of robbery, by
accompanying them during its commission and hasty getaway, as well as providing
payment for their getaway vehicle and even threatening their driver with mortal
harm shows his agreement of the crime.
- however, the CA acquitted Eddie Olazo and Miguel Corbis on the ground that
there was a lack of evidence in the records to sustain their conviction.
- Miguel Corbis – although he had participated in conspiring to commit robbery,
there was no showing of his actual aid or presence during its commission, he
cannot be held criminally liable.
- Eddie Olazo was never present during the planning of the commission of the crime
nor during the actual commission thereof
ISSUE:
Whether the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, erred in finding Charito guilty of the crime of Robbery with
Homicide.

HELD:

In the instant case, the candid testimony of state witness Joseph unmistakably produces a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt. That Charito was present before, during, and after
the commission of the crime and that there was conspiracy between the malefactors are
findings fully supported by the evidence on record

The Court note that both the RTC and the CA failed to consider
1. "evident premeditation"28 and
2. "taking advantage of superior strength"29 
as ordinary, aggravating circumstances, despite having been sufficiently alleged in the
Information filed with the RTC,

the aggravating circumstance of EVIDENT PREMEDITATION is present in this


case.
The Court said: While we have previously ruled that the circumstance of evident
premeditation is inherent in Robbery,33 it may be considered in the special complex crime
of Robbery with Homicide if there is premeditation to kill besides stealing.

Here, the evidence clearly established how and when Charito and his co-conspirators
hatched their malevolent plan to rob the spouses Vallecera and likewise "kill the victim".35 

that there were persistent attempts made by the accused sufficiently demonstrate how
determined they were to adhere to their agreement despite the sufficient lapse of time.

Moreover, that Charito and his cohorts went to great lengths to hire Joseph to ferry them
back and forth to the scene of the crime shows the sobriety and circumspection
surrounding their decision. Such circumstances therefore show that the crime committed
was a product of intent and coordination among the accused.

The requirements to prove the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation are the
following:

(i) the time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
(ii) an act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination; and
(iii) sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to allow him to
reflect upon the consequences of his act. 31 

To warrant a finding of evident premeditation, it must appear not only that the accused
decided to commit the crime prior to the moment of its execution, but also that such
decision was the result of "meditation, calculation, reflection, or persistent attempt".

the aggravating circumstance of "SUPERIOR STRENGTH" is properly cognizable.

to appreciate the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, what is to be


considered is whether the aggressors took advantage of their combined strength in order
to consummate the offense, e.g., that excessive force out of proportion to the means of
defense available to the victim was used.

In the case at bench, the records disclose that during the commission of the offense,
- Nicanor Vallecera was hogtied by three (3) of the perpetrators,
- while Erlinda Vallecera, a woman, was successively and fatally injured using a
samurai sword and a long knife.
Clearly, the means employed by the culprits were patently excessive, there being no
indication of retaliation from the spouses Vallecera as their means of defense were
greatly, if not absolutely, diminished.

WHEREFORE, Charito Fernandez  was found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the


crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code sentencing
him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua  and ordering him to pay the heirs of
Erlinda Vallecera the amount of (P 100,000.00) as civil indemnity, (P100,000.00) as moral
damages, (P100,000.00) as exemplary damages, and (P40,000.00) as actual
damages.39 All monetary awards shall earn interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%)
per annum from the date of finality of this Decision until fully paid.

You might also like