Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. No. 181594 -

G.R. No. 181594 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ROLLY FLORA Y CANDELARIA, MAURITO FLORA Y LIM, RAMON FLORA Y LIM, AND EREBERTO FLORA Y LIM.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Cited Laws

RA 640RA 166,RA 52RA 482,RA 176,RA 695,RA 7659,RA 333,RA 31,RA 7659
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: Convicting the accused Rolly Flora y Candelaria, Maurito Flora y Lim, Ramon Flora y Lim and Ereberto Flora y Lim guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide defined and penalized under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No.

Decision

Ruling

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: Convicting the accused Rolly Flora y Candelaria, Maurito Flora y Lim, Ramon Flora y Lim and Ereberto Flora y Lim guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide defined and penalized under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659 and hereby sentences each of them to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; To jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of Luisito Esperida the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for the death of Luisito Esperida, funeral and burial expenses in the amount of P22,701.00 and P50,000.00 as moral damages; and To pay the costs without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. [19] In holding appellants accountable for said crime, the RTC held that - Considering that the accused Rolly Flora invoked self-defense, it is therefore incumbent upon him to establish the same by clear and convincing evidence x x x. x x x x From the evidence adduced, it is clear that the accused have miserably failed to prove the aforecited requisites for self-defense. Their contention that the deceased Luisito Esperida was the aggressor is entirely belied by the straightforward, clear and convincing testimony of the prosecution witnesses, namely: the widow Nenita Esperida, the spouses Jason and Novie Vargas, Simeon Buesa and Domingo Pesico x x x eyewitnesses attested to the fact that Luisito Esperida was unarmed and utterly defenseless when he was simultaneously assaulted by the accused and fatally stabbed by accused Rolly Flora, thereby clearly showing that the victim could not have been the unlawful aggressor immediately prior to the concerted attack and fatal stabbing. x x x x Besides, this Court takes notice of the Medico Legal Findings issued by Dra. Rhodora Roa-Perez, Municipal Health Officer of Canaman, Camarines Sur, which states that the deceased Luisito Esperida y Sanchez suffered four (4) different stab wounds x x x. The testimony of said doctor that with the sizes of the wounds it may have been caused by one or two weapons, is given great weight by this Court and the possibility of two or more assailants was never destroyed even on cross examination. Accused's (sic) defense of alibi must fail in view of the positive identification of Ramon, Ereberto and Maurito as the co-perpetrators of the crime. The testimonies of the prosecution's eyewitnesses x x x that the said accuseds (sic) were present and actively participated in the commission of the crime charged belies accused denial x x x. x x x x On the witness stand, Ramon Flora testified that his house is merely 25 meters away from Esperida's residence x x x. Although he testified that he is (sic) in Bagumbayan Norte, Naga City, on that fateful date and time, buying nails as they were repairing the house of Emerson San Carlos, yet, this was belied by the testimony of the defense's own witness Emerson San Carlos who testified that they finished repairing his house befor