Republic of the PhilippinesDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEOFFICE OF THE CITY

PROSECUTORCity of IloiloP/Sr. Insp. MARCO A. JARODA,I.S. NO: ________________

Complainant,FOR: ROBBERY WITHHOMICIDE-versus-(Art. 294, par. (1), RevisedPenal
Code) TITO CRUZ and VIC CRUZ,Respondent.x--------------------------------------------------xR
E S O L U T I O N The Respondents, TITO CRUZ and VIC CRUZ were charged of the
crimeof ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE in a complaint filed by Police Senior
InspectorMARCO A. JARODA.In support of his complaint, the herein complainant
attached thefollowing documents:1. Joint Affidavits of Bea S. Robles and Francesca
S. Campos;2. Affidavit of Geraldine B. Demetri;3. Affidavit of Paris J. Michaels;4.
Affidavit of Police Officer Romeo V. Benamarca;5. Death Certificate of Joey Cruz;6.
Autopsy Report of Joey Cruz;7. Anatomical Sketch of Joey Cruz;8. Police Record of
Events and others.

Statement of Facts

Based on the investigation conducted by the Police Investigator, PO2 JANVIC CHAN,
the facts of the case are stated hereunder: That on or about the 24

th

day of May 2008, at around 12:45in the afternoon in Tabuc Suba, Jaro, Iloilo City,
Philippines, therespondents together with the deceased JOEY CRUZ conspiringand
confederating together and mutually helping one another,while armed with a
handgun staged a hold-up at IloiloSupermart, Tabuc Suba, Jaro Branch owned and
operated by JHONNY B. QUE. That while inside, the respondents took or stealaway
an amount of forty eight thousand (Php 48, 000) pesos andfood stuffs from the
grocery. Thereafter, they proceeded toPototan, Iloilo to divide the loot among
themselves. While theywere dividing the loot, an argument ensued between TITO
CRUZand JOEY CRUZ which prompted TITO CRUZ to draw his gun andshot JOEY
CRUZ in the forehead, killing the latter instantly.In the joint affidavit of witnesses
Bea S. Robles and Francesca R.Campos, they stated that on May 24, 2008 at about
12:45 in the afternoon,they were inside Iloilo Supermart when the robbery
happened. Whilestanding in Counter 1 to pay for their groceries, they saw a man
pointing a

gun at the cashier and declared a Hold up! while his two companionsemptied the
cash registers and took some grocery stuffs.In the affidavit of Geraldine B. Demetri,
one of the cashiers on dutyduring the time of the robbery, stated that while she was
at Counter 1, aperson pointed his gun to her and immediately declared a hold
up!and twoother customers who were falling in line to pay were ordered to drop on
theirknees. One of the robbers emptied the cash registers while the other tooksome
grocery stuffs.In the affidavit of Paris J. Michaels, one of the customers during
thetime of the robbery, stated that while she was standing near the
cosmeticssection, she heard a person declaring a hold up!. The other robber
forcedher to join the other customers to kneel down near counter 1. That
afteremptying the cash registers and taking some groceries, one of the
robbersshouted lakat na kita!. They immediately drove away using a red
ownertype jeep.And in the affidavit of Police Senior Inspector Romeo V.
Benamarca,stated that he was patrolling at Brgy. Mabalud, Pototan when he heard
agunshot from an abandoned rice mill. When he proceeded to the area, hesaw TITO
CRUZ holding a .45 caliber pistol and the lifeless body of JOEYCRUZ lying on the
ground with his own blood, while VIC CRUZ was juststanding a meter away from
TITO CRUZ. He recovered an amount of fortyeight thousand (Php 48, 000) pesos
inside a clear plastic bag with printedlogo of Iloilo Supermart. That he immediately
arrested TITO and VIC CRUZand brought them to the Pototan Police Station, while
JOEY CRUZ wasbrought to the nearest hospital. That upon further search in the
crime scene,an empty bullet shell and three (3) live ammunitions were likewise
recoveredand turned over to the exhibit custodian SPO2 Roger M. Carman.As for the
respondents, in their counter-affidavits, they vehementlydenied the accusations
against them putting up self-defense and alibi astheir defenses. TITO CRUZ alleged
that on May 24, 2008, he and his cousinsVIC and JOEY were on a drinking spree,
which started from eight oclock inthe morning and ended at around 2 oclock in the
afternoon. That he wasawakened by the shouting of his live-in partner TITA and
the commotionoutside of his house. He then took his gun and went out. There, he
saw JOEYholding a bag with TITOs money. Upon seeing him, while carrying a bolo,
JOEY ran towards TITO. So the latter shot the former in order to defendhimself.VIC
CRUZ likewise denied the allegations against him, stating that aftertheir drinking
spree on May 24, 2008, he went home. And at about fouroclock in the afternoon of
the said day, he was awakened by his mothertelling him that there were police
officers looking for him. He then voluntarilywent to the police station to answer the
charges against him.

Analyses/ Findings and Recommendations

Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code specifically states:Art. 294.

Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons- Penalties

Any person guilty of robbery with the use of violence or intimidation of anyperson
shall suffer:

1. The penalty of

Reclusion Perpetua
to death, when

by reason or onoccasion of the robbery

, the crime of homicide shall have been committed, xx x. (Italics Supplied)Robbery

with homicide arises only when there is a direct relation, anintimate connection,
between the robbery and the killing, even if the killing isprior to, concurrent with, or
subsequent to the robbery. (People vs.Salazar,277 SCRA 67 [1997]).

The facts of the case before us squarely fall under the crime of Robbery with
Homicide. The time element between the consummation of robbery in Iloilo City and
the killing of JOEY in Pototan, Iloilo is of no moment since the killing may be prior to,
concurrent with, or subsequent to therobbery. The killing of JOEY was intimately
connected or necessarily related with the robbery since the subject of the argument
which ensued between JOEY and TITO was the division of the loot, which were
essentially the effectsof the crime of robbery notwithstanding the fact that the
robbery took placein Iloilo City while the killing was done in Pototan, Iloilo. It is
enoughtherefore that the homicide resulted by reason or on the occasion of
therobbery in order to constitute the crime of Robbery with Homicide.

On the part of the defense of the respondent it is a settled rule thatalibi is the
weakest of all defenses because it is facile to fabricate anddifficult to disprove, and
is generally rejected. For alibi to prosper, it is notenough to prove that the
defendant was somewhere else when the crimewas committed, that he must
likewise demonstrate that it was impossible forhim to have been at the scene of the
crime at that time. (People vs.Malejana, 479 SCRA 610).Courts generally view the
defenses of denial and alibi with disfavor onaccount of the facility with which an
accused can concoct them to suit hisdefense. Alibi like denial, is also inherently
weak and fabricated----for thesedefenses to justify an acquittal, the following must
be established: thepresence of the accused in another place at the time of the
commission of the offense and the physical impossibility for him to be at the scene
of thecrime. (People vs. Mangit-ngit, 502 SCRA 560).

As regards the alibi of the respondents, that they were not at the placewhen the
crime was committed, cannot be appreciated since therespondents failed to
convince the Investigating Prosecutor that they satisfy all the elements to sustain
the defense of alibi. Pototan is more or less thirty (30) kilometers away from Iloilo
City, as such it can be reached by about thirty to forty five (30-45) minutes of travel
using any motorized vehicle.Hence, the respondents failed to demonstrate that it
was physically impossible for them to have been at the scene of the crime when the
samewas committed.

Respondent TITO CRUZ, as for his defense, admitted killing JOEY CRUZon the ground
of self-defense. However, it is a well settled rule that once anaccused has admitted
that he inflicted the fatal injuries on the deceased, it isincumbent upon him in order
to avoid criminal liability, to prove the justifyingcircumstance claimed by him with
clear, satisfactory and convincingevidence. (Cabuslay vs People, 471 SCRA 241)In
order for the justifying circumstance of self-defense to beappreciated, the following
requisites must concur, to wit: (1) Unlawful

aggression; (2) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent orrepel the
attack; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of theperson defending
himself.Aggression presupposes that the person attacked must face a realthreat to
his life and the peril sought to be avoided is imminent and actual,not
imaginary.Unlawful aggression, a primordial element of self-defense,
wouldpresuppose an actual, sudden and unexpected attack or imminent danger
onthe life and limb of the person---not a mere threatening or intimidatingattitude---
but most importantly, at the time the defensive action was takenagainst the
aggressor; there is aggression in contemplation of the law onlywhen the one
attacked faces real and immediate threat to ones life. (Peoplevs Dagani, 499 SCRA
64)

TITO CRUZ failed to persuade the Investigating Prosecutor that thekilling was indeed
done in self-defense. The element of unlawful aggressionwas lacking since based on
the respondents affidavit, the deceased JOEY CRUZ was holding a bolo and running
towards him when he decided to shot the victim. Based on the facts alleged, it can
be gleaned that there was yet no unlawful aggression as there was no actual or
imminent danger on TITOslife and limb. The danger feared by TITO most likely was
merely imaginary.Hence, the theory of self-defense by TITO must fail.

WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING,

it is most respectfullyrecommended that an information for the crime of Robbery

with Homicide befiled against the respondents TITO and VIC CRUZ.Iloilo City, June 4,
2008.

PLARIDEL H. MAKABAYAN

Assistant City ProsecutorAPPROVED BY:

GREGORIO T. TAROSA

Chief City ProsecutorCopy Furnished:(1) Tito Cruz- Brgy. Mabalud, Pototan, Iloilo(2)
Vic Cruz- Brgy. Mabalud, Pototan, Iloilo