PEOPLE v.

VERZOSA
August 20, 1998 | Kapunan, J. | Appeal | Complaint & Information: Form & Constituent Allegations
PETITIONER: People of the Philippines
RESPONDENT: Romulo Verzosa y Garcia and Jerry Avendao y Mendoza, accused-appellants
SUMMARY: The accused-appellants robbed a jeep on the C-3 Road and killed a passenger. The
Information was erroneously captioned as highway robbery with homicide (Violation of P.D. 532). The
trial court found them guilty of crime of highway robbery with homicide under P.D. 532 (Anti-Piracy and
Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974). On appeal, the SC found them liable for the special complex crime
of robbery with homicide instead.
DOCTRINE: The designation of the crime in the Information as highway robbery with homicide
(Violation of P.D. 532) does not preclude conviction of the appellants of the crime of robbery with
homicide. In the interpretation of an Information, what controls is not the designation but the description of
the offense charged. The crime of robbery with homicide was clearly alleged in the Information
notwithstanding the erroneous caption.
FACTS:
1. There was a hold-up in a passenger jeep cruising
along C-3 Road, North Bay Boulevard, Navotas,
Metro Manila. One passenger fought back and
was shot. He died.
2. More than a week later, the appellants were
positively identified by a passenger.
3. The Information read: That on or about the 21st
day of April 1994, in Navotas, Metro Manila,
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, armed with a
gun, conspiring, confederating ang mutually
helping with (sic) one another, with intent to
gain and by means of violence and intimidation,
did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously take, rob and carry away the
passengers wristwatches with an unestimated
amount while aboard a passenger jeepney with
Plate No. NYZ-655, along NBB South, Navotas,
Metro Manila and in the course thereof said
accused with intent to kill, willfully, unlawfully,
and feloniously, shoot passenger ALBERTO
APLAON, hitting the latter on the back of his
head, thereby inflicting upon the victim gunshot
wound which cause (sic) his immediate death.
4. Captioned: highway robbery with homicide
(Violation of P.D. 532)
5. RTC found them guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Highway Robbery with
Homicide under P.D. 532.
ISSUE/S:
1. WON the conviction should be affirmed NO

RULING: Conviction of crime of highway robbery

with homicide is MODIFIED. Appellants are found
guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with
homicide under Art. 294, RPC.
RATIO:
1. P.D. 532 contemplates several accused organized
for the purpose of committing highway robbery
indiscriminately. Such is not proven in this case.
2. On the other hand, the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide is committed when, on
the occasion of the robbery, homicide resulted.
3. Despite the erroneous caption, the Information
clearly alleged the crime of robbery with
homicide. It is an offense necessarily included in
that with which they were charged. Accusedappellants conviction of crime of robbery with
homicide is therefore not precluded.

***Going back to Crim2 with Sir Arreza, just because it

happened on a highway, it doesnt mean it was a highway
robbery under P.D. 532 already. Fortunately, the allegations
necessary to convict for Art. 294, RPC were present in the
Information.