Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 110 views

    CRIM1 - People v. Escote (Aggravating-Treachery) G.R. No. 140756, 4 April 2003, 400 SCRA 603

    Uploaded by

    Christine Casidsid
    1. The Supreme Court ruled that treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide when the victim is killed with treachery. Treachery does not constitute an element of the crime or a separate punishable crime, but can be used to impose a higher penalty. 2. For treachery to be appreciated against multiple accused, they must have knowledge of the treacherous manner in which the homicide was committed. 3. In this case, treachery could not be appreciated against the accused Juan and Victor because the information did not allege treachery.

    Copyright:

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

    CRIM1 - People v. Escote (Aggravating-Treachery) G.R. No. 140756, 4 April 2003, 400 SCRA 603

    Uploaded by

    Christine Casidsid
    110 views1 page
    1. The Supreme Court ruled that treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide when the victim is killed with treachery. Treachery does not constitute an element of the crime or a separate punishable crime, but can be used to impose a higher penalty. 2. For treachery to be appreciated against multiple accused, they must have knowledge of the treacherous manner in which the homicide was committed. 3. In this case, treachery could not be appreciated against the accused Juan and Victor because the information did not allege treachery.

    Original Description:

    Hope this helps :)

    Original Title

    CRIM1_People v. Escote [Aggravating—Treachery] G.R. No. 140756, 4 April 2003, 400 SCRA 603

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The Supreme Court ruled that treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide when the victim is killed with treachery. Treachery does not constitute an element of the crime or a separate punishable crime, but can be used to impose a higher penalty. 2. For treachery to be appreciated against multiple accused, they must have knowledge of the treacherous manner in which the homicide was committed. 3. In this case, treachery could not be appreciated against the accused Juan and Victor because the information did not allege treachery.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    110 views1 page

    CRIM1 - People v. Escote (Aggravating-Treachery) G.R. No. 140756, 4 April 2003, 400 SCRA 603

    Uploaded by

    Christine Casidsid
    1. The Supreme Court ruled that treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide when the victim is killed with treachery. Treachery does not constitute an element of the crime or a separate punishable crime, but can be used to impose a higher penalty. 2. For treachery to be appreciated against multiple accused, they must have knowledge of the treacherous manner in which the homicide was committed. 3. In this case, treachery could not be appreciated against the accused Juan and Victor because the information did not allege treachery.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Case # 143 : People v.

    Escote [Aggravating—Treachery]
    G.R. No. 140756, 4 April 2003, 400 SCRA 603

    FACTS:
    • 9/28/1996: Rodolfo Cacatian, the regular driver of a Five Star Passenger Bus bearing, drove the bus from its terminal at Pasay City to
    Bolinao, Pangasinan. Also on board was Romulo Digap, the regular conductor of the bus, as well as some passengers.
    • At Balintawak, Victor Acuyan (accused1) and Juan Gonzales Escote, Jr. (accused2). Another passenger, SPO1 Jose C. Manio, Jr. (victim,
    deceased), was seated at the rear portion of the bus on his way home to Angeles City. Tucked on his waist was his service gun. The lights of
    the bus were on.
    • When the bus was traveling along the highway in Plaridel, Bulacan, Juan and Victor suddenly stood up, whipped out their handguns and
    announced a holdup. Juan and Victor fired their guns upward to awaken and scare off the passengers. They accosted the passengers and
    the conductor and divested them of their money and valuables.
    • They went to Manio and demanded that he show them his identification card and wallet. Juan and Victor took the identification card of the
    police officer as well as his service gun and told him: “Pasensya ka na Pare, papatayin ka namin, baril mo rin ang papatay sa’yo.” Manio
    pleaded for mercy.
    • However, Victor and Juan ignored the plea of the police officer and shot him on the mouth, right ear, chest and right side of his body.
    • Victor and Juan then moved towards the driver and ordered him to maintain the speed of the bus. They further told Rodolfo that after they
    have alighted from the bus, he should continue driving and not report the incident. If the latter will follow their instructions, he will not be
    harmed. Victor and Juan ordered Rodolfo to stop the bus along the overpass in Mexico, Pampanga where they alighted from the bus. The
    robbery was over in 25 minutes.
    • When the bus reached Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga, Rodolfo and Romulo reported the incident to the police authorities.

    ISSUE:
    1. WoN treachery is a generic AC in robbery with homicide.
    2. If yes, WoN treachery may be appreciated against Juan and Victor.

    SC RULING:
    1. YES. This Court has ruled over the years that treachery is a generic AC in the felony of robbery with homicide, a special complex crime (un
    delito especial complejo) and at the same time a single and indivisible offense (uno solo indivisible). BUT the Court has held in two cases
    that [NB: for discussion only]:
    (i) Robbery with homicide is a crime against property, hence, treachery which is appreciated only to crimes against persons should not
    be appreciated as a generic AC.
    (ii) Treachery is not appreciated in robbery with rape precisely because robbery with rape is a crime against property

    Homicide or rape are merely incidents of the robbery, with robbery being the main purpose and object of the criminal.

    However, this Court held in People vs. Cando that treachery is a generic AC in robbery with homicide, citing its prior rulings that in robbery
    with homicide, treachery is a generic AC when the victim of homicide is killed with treachery. Justice Regalado opined that treachery
    cannot be considered in robbery but can be appreciated insofar as the killing is concerned.

    Treachery is not an element of robbery with homicide. Neither does it constitute a crime specially punishable by law nor is it included by
    the law in defining the crime of robbery with homicide and prescribing the penalty therefor. Treachery is likewise not inherent in the crime of
    robbery with homicide. Hence, treachery should be considered as a generic AC in robbery with homicide for the imposition of the
    proper penalty for the crime.

    In sum then, treachery is a generic aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide when the victim of homicide is killed by treachery.

    2. YES. RPC A62(4) provides that circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish
    it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act
    or their cooperation therein.

    The circumstances attending the commission of a crime either relate to the persons participating in the crime or into its manner of
    execution or to the means employed. Where two or more persons perpetrate the crime of robbery with homicide, the generic AC of
    treachery shall be appreciated against all of the felons who had knowledge of the manner of the killing of victims of homicide.

    BUT treachery cannot be appreciated against Juan and Victor in the case at bar because it was not alleged in the Information.

    You might also like