Celedonio v. People

Summary

Eduardo Celedonio was convicted of robbery with force upon things for breaking into his neighbor Carmencita De Guzman's house and stealing items worth P223,000. The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence including eyewitness testimony from neighbor Adriano Marquez, recovery of stolen items from Celedonio's motorcycle compartment, and his inability to explain possession of the items. Celedonio challenged the conviction arguing insufficient circumstantial evidence, illegal search and seizure, and witness bias. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts, ruling that the circumstantial evidence met the requirements under Rule 133 and that no illegal search occurred since Celedonio voluntarily opened his motorcycle compartment. The case demonstrates the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence in criminal convictions when forming an unbroken chain leading to guilt beyond reasonable doubt.