Anarna, Ma. Jelly Joyce Y.

Criminal Law II Atty David Yap

Class Student No. 3 CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY DAY 6

FORTUNA VS PEOPLE G.R. No. 135784. December 15, 2000 348 SCRA 360

BELLOSILLO, J.:

FACTS:
Around 5:00pm on 21 July 1992, Mario Montecillo together with his sister Diosdada
Monteciilo where standing in front of Harrison Plaza when a police car with 3 policemen on
board, stopped in front of them, accused them of carrying a deadly weapon and ask them to
board the police car.

While in the police car, they were intimidated by policemen seated in front, by telling
them that they will be brought to the police station, and that the penalty for carrying a deadly
weapon is php 12,000. The policemen asked for their money, but the driver took php 1,500
from the php 5,000 totality in Diosdada's wallet and asked if there were any jewelry that he can
get. After getting what they want, they let them go.

Diosdada relayed the story to her boss and accompanied her to General Diokno, in
which he summoned the 3 identified policemen, PO2 Ricardo Fortuna was the one seated
beside them, PO2 Eduardo Garcia, was the one who frisked them and PO3 Ramon Pablo, the
driver.

The Regional Trial Court in finding the accussed appellant guilty of the crime robbery.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision.

Fortuna contends that the Court of Appeals erred in claiming that the money was given
under duress and that there is conspiracy.

ISSUE:
Whether or not RTC and CA erred in holding Fortuna conspired with the accused Pablo
and Garcia in intimidating private complainants to give them their money?

HELD:
NO, RTC and CA did not erred in holding Fortuna conspired with the accused Pablo and
Garcia in intimidating private complainants to give them their money.

In the case at bar, there was indeed sufficient intimidation applied on the offended
parties as the acts performed by the three (3) accused, coupled with the circumstances under
which they were executed, engendered fear in the minds of their victims and hindered the free
exercise of their will. The three (3) accused succeeded in coercing them to choose between two
(2) alternatives, to wit: to part with their money or suffer the burden and humiliation of being
taken to the police station.

Supreme Court's decision AFFIRMED the RTC and CA's decision with the modification
that accused-appellant Ricardo Fortuna is SENTENCED to the indeterminate prison term of
two (2) years four (4) months and twenty (20) days of the medium period of arresto mayor
maximum to prision correccional medium, as minimum, to eight (8) years two (2) months and
ten (10) days of the maximum period of prision correccional maximum to prision mayor
medium, as maximum.
Costs against accused-appellant Ricardo Fortuna.