Search
Title
Briones v. People
Case Ponente Decision Date
G.R. No. 156009 BRION, J : 2009-06-05
Case AI Summary AI Digest Ask Jurist AI
Facts
This case involves a petition for review on certiorari filed by Rommel C. Briones (Briones) against the
decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) finding him guilty of the crime of robbery. The case originated from a
criminal information filed against Briones for robbery, wherein it was alleged that he forcibly took a .38
caliber gun from the complainant, S/G Dabbin Molina. Briones pleaded not guilty to the charge.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) initially found Briones guilty of simple theft, as the elements of violence and
intimidation required for the crime of robbery were not proven. However, on appeal, the CA ruled that
Briones was guilty of robbery, as force and intimidation were present when he took the firearm from S/G
Molina. Briones filed an Omnibus Motion with the CA, confessing his participation in the robbery but
claiming that he was protecting his brother. The CA denied the motion, leading to the present petition.
Issue
The main issues raised in the case are whether there are factual and legal bases to support Briones'
conviction for robbery, and whether a new trial is justified.
Ruling
The Supreme Court (SC) reviewed the evidence and found no reason to disturb the findings of the RTC and
CA regarding Briones' guilt. The prosecution presented a credible eyewitness, S/G Gual, who positively
identified Briones as the person who took the firearm. Briones' defenses of denial and alibi were not
substantiated and his attempt to change his defense on appeal was not allowed. The SC also found that the
recovery of the firearm and the affidavits presented by Briones did not affect the merits of the case.
Ultimately, the SC upheld Briones' conviction but modified it to theft instead of robbery. The elements of
robbery, which include violence or intimidation against persons, were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The SC concluded that Briones committed theft by taking the firearm without violence or intimidation.
Therefore, the decision of the CA was affirmed with modification.
Ratio
The Supreme Court ruled that Briones should be convicted of theft instead of robbery. The evidence
showed that Briones grabbed the firearm and ran away with it, but there was no evidence of violence or
intimidation. Therefore, the element of violence or intimidation necessary for a conviction of robbery was
not present. The court emphasized that the character of the crime is determined by the ultimate facts and
circumstances in the complaint or information, not by the caption or preamble.
Regarding the penalty, the court noted that no evidence was presented to prove the value of the stolen
:
firearm. The RTC relied on the allegation in the information that the firearm was worth P8,000.00, more or
less, and sentenced Briones accordingly. However, in the absence of clear evidence, any doubt should be
resolved in favor of the accused. The court determined that the lightest penalty applicable to theft, where
the value of the stolen property does not exceed five pesos, is imprisonment of one (1) month and one (1)
day to four (4) months. Therefore, Briones was sentenced to four (4) months of arresto mayor.
Summary
In summary, the Supreme Court found Briones guilty of theft instead of robbery, based on the absence of
violence or intimidation in the taking of the firearm. Briones was sentenced to four (4) months of arresto
mayor.
Privacy Policy Terms of Service
© 2023 Jurist AI. All rights reserved.
:
