TITLE: People v.
Agalarme and Gelle
CASE: G.R No. 175978
DATE: February 12, 2009
FACTS:
● At Cadiz City Park, Cadiz City, Negros Occidental, Philippines, Agalarme and Gelle accused
conspiring,
confederating and helping one another with evident premeditation and treachery and with intent to kill,
did
then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously assault, attack and stab to death one Loreto Batarilan
y
Ladiona, a tricycle driver, in order to rob, steal, and take away a belt bag containing money and the wrist
watch Seiko 5
● The appellants were charged with robbery with homicide based on testimony from key witnesses.
According
to Dr. Jimmily Aguiling, who examined the body, testified that the cause of death was hypovolemic shock
secondary to multiple stab wounds.
● Rizaldy Gelle testified that he did not know his co-accused, Samuel Algarme, He claimed that, the
night of
the crime, he was watching a billiard game in front of his house on Mabini Street, Cadiz City.
● Algarme had escaped confinement and was later killed in a shoot-out with the police. This report
confirmed
that Samuel was indeed killed on February 29, 1996, during a police encounter. As a result, the RTC
issued
an order on October 17, 2002, changing its earlier decision and dismissing the case against Samuel, given
his
death.
● The CA, in its decision on September 7, 2006, affirmed the RTC’s ruling but reduced the death penalty
imposed on Rizaldy Gelle to reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment), following the abolition of the death
penalty in the Philippines.
● Rizaldy raised several issues, such as questioning the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses, denying
the
existence of a conspiracy between him and Samuel, and arguing that treachery had not been proven,
which
would have justified a lighter penalty. He also contended that the elements of the crime had not been
proven
beyond a reasonable doubt.
ISSUE:
● Whether the appellants are guilty of robbery with homicide? or if they should instead be held liable for
separate crimes of homicide and theft.
RULING:
● No. The Supreme Court modified the decision of the RTC and the Court of Appeals. It ruled that the
prosecution failed to prove that the primary motive was robbery. Instead, the Court held that the killing
was
not incidental to the robbery, appellant Rizaldy Gelle is found GUILTY of the separate crimes of
homicide
and theft
