Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 64 views

    People V Balute PDF

    Uploaded by

    Erika Mariz Cunanan
    (1) Balute was convicted of robbery with homicide for the killing of SPO1 Manaois during a robbery. Balute appealed his conviction. (2) The Supreme Court upheld Balute's conviction, finding he was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on eyewitness testimony identifying him as the assailant. (3) For robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove taking property belonging to another with intent to gain and violence/intimidation, and that a homicide was committed on occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court found these elements were satisfied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People V Balute PDF

    Uploaded by

    Erika Mariz Cunanan
    64 views2 pages
    (1) Balute was convicted of robbery with homicide for the killing of SPO1 Manaois during a robbery. Balute appealed his conviction. (2) The Supreme Court upheld Balute's conviction, finding he was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on eyewitness testimony identifying him as the assailant. (3) For robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove taking property belonging to another with intent to gain and violence/intimidation, and that a homicide was committed on occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court found these elements were satisfied.

    Original Description:

    Ppl

    Original Title

    Kupdf.net People v Balute PDF

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    (1) Balute was convicted of robbery with homicide for the killing of SPO1 Manaois during a robbery. Balute appealed his conviction. (2) The Supreme Court upheld Balute's conviction, finding he was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on eyewitness testimony identifying him as the assailant. (3) For robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove taking property belonging to another with intent to gain and violence/intimidation, and that a homicide was committed on occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court found these elements were satisfied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    64 views2 pages

    People V Balute PDF

    Uploaded by

    Erika Mariz Cunanan
    (1) Balute was convicted of robbery with homicide for the killing of SPO1 Manaois during a robbery. Balute appealed his conviction. (2) The Supreme Court upheld Balute's conviction, finding he was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on eyewitness testimony identifying him as the assailant. (3) For robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove taking property belonging to another with intent to gain and violence/intimidation, and that a homicide was committed on occasion or by reason of the robbery. The Court found these elements were satisfied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No. 212932 People v.

    Balute y Villanueva January 21, 2015

    People of the Philippines,  Arnel Balute y Villanueva,


    Villanueva,
    plaintiff-appellee accused-appellant
    Perlas-Bernabe, J.

    FACTS:
     Information: charging Balute of the crime of Robbery with Homicide, defined and penalized under Article

    294 (1) of the RPC


     SPO1 Raymundo Manaois was on board his owner-type jeepney with his wife Cristita and daughter
    Blesilda, and was traversing Tondo, Manila. While the vehicle was at a stop due to heavy traffic, two male
    persons, Balute and a certain Leo Blaster, suddenly appeared on either side of the jeepney, with Balute
    poking a gun at the side of SPO1 Manaois and saying " putang ina, ilabas mo! "
     Balute grabbed SPO1 Manaois's mobile phone from the latter's chest pocket and shot him at the left side
    of his torso. SPO1 Manaois reacted by drawing his own firearm and alighting from his vehicle, but he was
    unable to fire at the assailants as he fell to the ground. He was taken to Mary Johnston Hospital where he
    died despite medical intervention.
    intervention.
     Balute denied charges against him maintaining that he was at the shop of a certain Leticia Nicol wherein
    he worked as a pedicab welder from 8:00 AM until 10:00 PM, and did not notice any untoward incident as
    he was busy working the entire time. Nicol corroborated Balute's story, and imputed liability on Blaster
    and a certain Intoy.
     RTC: Balute is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Robbery with Homicide with the aggravating
    circumstance of treachery
    o Prosecution was able to establish the existence of all the elements of Robbery with Homicide.
     CA: Affirmed with modification in that the aggravating circumstance of treachery was no longer considered
    as the prosecution failed to allege the same in the Information.

    ISSUE:
     Whether or not the
    the CA correctly upheld Balute's conviction
    conviction for
    for Robbery with Homicide.
    Homicide. YES

    HELD:
     SC: Balute found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Robbery with Homicide defined and
    penalized under Article 294 (1) of the RPC.
      A special complex crime of robbery
    robbery with homicide takes place when a homicide is committed
    committed either by
    reason, or on the occasion, of the robbery. To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide, the
    prosecution must prove the following elements:
    (1)  The taking of personal
    personal property belonging
    belonging to another;
    another;
    (2)  With intent to gain;
    gain;
    (3)  With the use of violence
    violence or intimidation
    intimidation against a person; and
    (4) On the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as used in its generic sense, was
    committed.
     Conviction requires certitude that the robbery is the main purpose, and the objective of the malefactor and
    the killing is merely incidental to the robbery. The intent to rob must precede the taking of human life but
    the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery.
     Homicide is said to have been committed by reason or on occasion of robbery if it was committed:
    (a)  To facilitate the robbery
    robbery or the escape of
    of the culprit;
    (b)  To preserve the possession
    possession by the culprit of the
    the loot;
    (c)  To prevent discovery
    discovery of the commission of of the robbery;
    robbery; or
    (d)  To eliminate witnesses
    witnesses in the commission
    commission of the crime.
    crime.
    G.R. No. 212932 People v. Balute y Villanueva January 21, 2015

     Prosecution was able to establish that Balute poked his gun at SPO1 Manaois, took the latter's mobile
    phone, and thereafter, shot him, resulting in his death. This is buttressed by Cristita and Blesilda's positive
    identification of Balute as the one who committed the crime as opposed to the latter's denial and alibi. The
    natural interest of witnesses, who are relatives of the victim, in securing the conviction of the guilty would
    actually deter them from implicating persons other than the true culprits.

    You might also like