- Petitioner
- Rommel C. Briones
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. 156009
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decided
- June 5, 2009
Whether the taking of a security guard's firearm constituted robbery (with violence/intimidation) or theft
Summary
Rommel Briones was charged with robbery for taking a security guard's .38 caliber firearm during a mauling incident in BF Homes, Parañaque. The RTC initially convicted him of theft, finding insufficient evidence of violence or intimidation. The Court of Appeals upgraded the conviction to robbery, but the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the evidence only supported theft since witness testimony showed Briones merely 'grabbed' the firearm without violence or intimidation. The Court rejected Briones' motion for new trial based on alleged newly discovered evidence and attempted change of defense strategy, emphasizing that clients are bound by their counsel's actions and that the firearm's recovery did not negate the commission of theft. The decision clarifies the distinction between robbery and theft, with violence or intimidation being the key differentiating element.
Focus of dispute
Whether the taking of a security guard's firearm constituted robbery (with violence/intimidation) or theft
Legal facts
On January 6, 1998, around 11:00 p.m., security guards S/G Dabbin Molina and S/G George Gual were manning the northwest gate of BF Homes Northwest, Parañaque. They observed Romulo Bersamina being mauled by four individuals, including Briones and his brother Vicente Briones. When the security guards approached to stop the mauling, Briones grabbed S/G Molina's .38 caliber revolver worth P8,000.00 and ran away with it. The firearm was never recovered.
Judgement and reasoning
Court of Appeals (CA): Found Briones guilty of robbery under Article 293 in relation to paragraph 5 of Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. The CA ruled that force and intimidation attended the taking of S/G Molina's firearm, as Briones approached S/G Molina with the intent of taking his firearm away. The CA found S/G Gual's testimony credible and categorical, noting that defense did not cross-examine him.
Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 257, Parañaque City: Found Briones guilty of simple theft under paragraph 3, Article 309 of the Revised Penal Code. The RTC ruled that the elements of violence and intimidation required for robbery were not duly proven, as witness S/G Gual merely testified that Briones 'grabbed the firearm of S/G Molina.' The court gave greater weight to prosecution's positive testimony and rejected Briones' defenses of denial and alibi.
Supreme Court (SC): Modified the decision and found Briones guilty of theft, not robbery. The SC ruled that S/G Gual's testimony did not show that violence or intimidation attended the taking - he only testified that Briones 'merely grabbed the firearm and ran away with it.' The Court rejected motions for new trial, ruling that change of defense theory on appeal is not allowed and that alleged newly discovered evidence did not meet requirements. Sentenced Briones to 4 months arresto mayor for theft under Article 308.