When Does a Killing During a Robbery Not Qualify as Robbery with Homicide?

The Crucial Link Between Robbery and Killing: Understanding Robbery with Homicide

TLDR: The Supreme Court clarifies that for a killing during a robbery to be considered “robbery with homicide,” a direct and intimate connection between the robbery and the killing must be proven. If the robbery element is not proven beyond reasonable doubt, the crime is simply homicide.

G.R. No. 118240, October 28, 1997

Introduction

Imagine a scenario: a robbery occurs, and someone ends up dead. Automatically, one might assume the crime is “robbery with homicide.” However, Philippine law requires more than just the coincidence of these two events. The Supreme Court case of People v. Bajar highlights the critical importance of establishing a direct connection between the robbery and the killing to secure a conviction for the complex crime of robbery with homicide. This case underscores that the prosecution must prove the robbery element beyond reasonable doubt, or the accused can only be convicted of homicide.

In this case, Giovanni Bajar y Cabog was initially convicted of robbery with homicide. The prosecution alleged that he, along with others, robbed Ramon Mallari and, in the process, shot and killed him. The trial court found Bajar guilty and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. However, the Supreme Court re-evaluated the evidence and ultimately modified the conviction to simple homicide.

Legal Context: Defining Robbery with Homicide

The crime of robbery with homicide is a special complex crime under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. It is not simply robbery and homicide committed separately; it requires a specific link. The elements of this crime are:

Intent to gain (animus lucrandi)

Unlawful taking of personal property belonging to another

Violence against or intimidation of any person by reason of which, or on occasion of which, homicide is committed

Article 293 of the Revised Penal Code defines robbery:n
“Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence against or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything, shall be guilty of robbery.“n

The Supreme Court has consistently held that the homicide must be committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery. This means there must be a direct and intimate connection between the robbery and the killing. If the robbery is not proven, the crime is not robbery with homicide, even if a killing occurred.

Case Breakdown: From Robbery with Homicide to Homicide

The case unfolded as follows:

The Incident: Ramon Mallari was shot and killed in front of the Pritil market in Tondo, Manila. An eyewitness, Melchor Santos, identified Giovanni Bajar as the shooter.

Initial Accusation: Bajar was charged with robbery with homicide, with the prosecution alleging he and others robbed Mallari of P20,700.00.

Trial Court Decision: The Regional Trial Court found Bajar guilty of robbery with homicide and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

Appeal to the Supreme Court: Bajar appealed, arguing lack of positive identification and insufficient evidence to prove the robbery.

Key to the Supreme Court’s decision was the lack of evidence directly linking Bajar to the robbery. While the prosecution presented evidence of the shooting, it failed to prove that Bajar actually took any money or valuables from Mallari. The eyewitness, Santos, even stated that he did not know if anything was taken from the victim.

As the Supreme Court stated:

“Santos, in his testimony, failed to mention the robbery angle. In fact, in his sworn statement, he stated categorically that he did not know whether the assailants had taken anything from the victim (“Hindi ko po alam kung may kinuha po.”)

ASG Law