WHEN KILLING IS INVOLVED IN ROBBERY

Special Complex Crime of Robbery with Homicide

When by reason or on occasion of robbery the crime of homicide is committed, the crime is a
special complex crime of robbery with homicide as defined under Art 294 of the Revised Penal
Code. The term “homicide” is used in its generic sense and it includes any kind of killing whether
it be murder, parricide or infanticide.

The phrases “on occasion” and “by reason” of the robbery denotes that the homicide must be
committed in the course or because of robbery. When the homicide was not committed “on
occasion” or “by reason” of the robbery, then robbery and homicide are separate offenses.

An intent to take personal property belonging to another with intent to gain must precede the
killing. If the idea of taking the personal property of another with intent to gain came to the mind
of the offender after he had killed the victim, he is guilty of two separate crimes of homicide or
murder, as the case may be, and theft. But when the intent to commit robbery preceded the
taking of human life, it is immaterial that the offenders had also a desire to avenge grievances
against the person killed. They are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide.

The rule is that where the original design comprehends robbery, and homicide is perpetrated
with a view to the consummation of the robbery, the offense committed is the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide, even though homicide precedes robbery by an appreciable time.
If the original design is not to commit robbery, but robbery is committed after the homicide as
an afterthought and a minor incident in the homicide, the criminal acts should be viewed as two
distinct offenses. Robbery with homicide arises only when there is a direct relation, an intimate
connection, between the robbery and the killing, even if the killing is prior to, concurrent with,
or subsequent to the robbery.

Accordingly, homicide is said to have been committed on occasion or by reason of robbery if it is

committed a) to facilitate the robbery or the escape of the culprit; b) to preserve the possession
by the culprit of the loot; c) to prevent discovery of the commission of the robbery; d) to eliminate
witnesses to the commission of the crime.

Meanwhile, the juridical concept of robbery with homicide does not limit the taking of life to one
single victim making the slaying of human beings in excess of that number punishable as
separate, independent offense or offenses. All the homicides or murders are merged in the
composite, integrated whole that is robbery with homicide so long as all the killings were
perpetrated by reason or on occasion of the robbery.

Moreover, the law contemplates that when robbery with homicide is committed in a dwelling, it
is not required that robbery with force upon things be committed first. More so, it is not required
that robbery with homicide be committed inside a building.
It is also worthy to note that there is no such crime as robbery with murder. Treachery cannot be
considered as a qualifying circumstance of murder, because the crime charged is the special
crime of robbery with homicide. The treachery which attended the commission of the crime must
be considered not qualifying but merely as a generic aggravating circumstance.

When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of robbery, the crime is the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide, the rape to be considered as an aggravating circumstance only.

Furthermore, when homicide is not proved, the crime is only robbery. When robbery is not
proved, the crime is only homicide.

PERSONS LIABLE

Whenever homicide is committed by reason of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who
took part in the commission of the robbery are also guilty as principals in the crime of homicide
unless it appears that they endeavored to prevent the homicide.

All those who conspired in the robbery will also be liable for the death unless he proved he
endeavored to prevent the killing. Physical absence in the place where the killing took place is
not a defense, or that the accused was not aware his co-accused would resort to a killing.

Significantly, if the consummated felony is robbery with homicide, there is no legal basis for
imposing upon the accessory the penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed for robbery
only. Robbery cannot be separated from homicide, because they are merged in the composite,
integrated whole - the special complex crime of robbery with homicide punishable with one
penalty.

Robbery by a band

If the robbery with homicide is committed by a band, the indictable offense would still be
denominated as "robbery with homicide." There is no crime as "robbery with homicide in band."

When the robbery was not by a band and homicide was not determined by the accused when
they plotted the crime, the one who did not participate in the killing is liable for robbery only.
But when there is conspiracy to commit homicide and robbery, all the conspirators, even if less
than four armed men, are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide.

A principal by inducement, who did not go with the band at the place of the commission of the
robbery, is not liable for robbery with homicide, but only for robbery in band, there being no
evidence that he gave instructions to kill the victim or intended that this should be done.

But the principal by induction would be liable for the homicide that might have resulted, if he
also ordered the killing of a person or anyone who would resist the robbery.
PENALTY

The penalty for the said crime is reclusion perpetua to death. However, relationship in robbery
with homicide is a mitigating circumstance.

Both the robbery and the homicide should be consummated to be penalized by Reclusion
Perpetua to Death.

1. If it was the Robbery which was not consummated, but there was a killing, it is still a special
complex crime of Attempted or Frustrated Robbery with Homicide but the penalty to be imposed,
as provided for under Article 297, is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua.

2. If both the robbery and the killing are either attempted or frustrated, the result is either a
complex crime of Attempted/Robbery with Attempted/Frustrated Homicide under Article 48, or
as separate crimes depending on the circumstances.

3. If the Robbery is consummated but the homicide is attempted or frustrated, they may be
ordinary complex crimes or separate crimes depending on the circumstances and the penalty for
the more serious crime which is frustrated or attempted homicide should be imposed in its
maximum period, as provided in Art 48 of the Revised Penal Code.

WHEN KILLING IS INVOLVED IN KIDNAPPING OR SERIOUS ILLEGAL DENTENTION

Special Complex Crime of Kidnapping with Murder

The rule contemplated by the law is that, where the person kidnapped is killed in the course of
the detention, regardless of whether the killing was purposely sought or was merely an
afterthought, the kidnapping and murder or homicide can no longer be complexed under Art. 48,
nor be treated as separate crimes, but shall be punished as a special complex crime under the
last paragraph of Art. 267, as amended by R.A. No. 7659.

Specific Intent, determinative of whether crime committed is murder or kidnapping. In murder,

the specific intent is to kill the victim. In kidnapping, the specific intent is to deprive the victim of
his/her liberty. Specific intent may be proved by direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence. It
may be inferred from the circumstances of the actions of the accused as established by the
evidence on record.

WHEN MURDER, AND NOT KIDNAPPING

If the primary and ultimate purpose of the accused is to kill the victim, the incidental deprivation
of the victim's liberty does not constitute the felony of kidnapping but is merely a preparatory
act to the killing, and hence, is merged into, or absorbed by, the killing of the victim. The crime
committed would either be murder or homicide.

Thus, where the victim was taken from one place to another, solely for the purpose of killing him
and not for detaining him for any length of time or for the purpose of obtaining ransom for his
release, the crime committed is murder, and not the complex crime of kidnapping with murder.

PENALTY

As amended by RA 7659, when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention...
the maximum penalty shall be imposed.

HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2017 (RA 9372)

Under RA 9372, terrorism is committed by any person who commits murder under Art 248 of the
Revised Penal Code, among others, thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary dear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in
to an unlawful demand.

PERSONS LIABLE

1. Principals
2. Persons who conspire to commit the crime of terrorism
3. Accomplices
4. Accessories

PENALTY

Those guilty of the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment,
without the benefit of parole.

It is noteworthy that prosecution under RA 9372 shall be a bar to another prosecution under the
Revised Penal Code or any Special Penal Laws.

WHEN KILLING IS INVOLVED IN REBELLION

The crime of rebellion consists of many acts. It is a vast movement of men and a complex net of
intrigues and plots. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion though crimes in themselves are
deemed absorbed in one single crime of rebellion (Doctrine of Absorption).
The proper charge against persons who kill not because of any personal motive on their part but
merely in pursuance of the movement to overthrow the duly constituted authorities, would be
rebellion and not murder.

Thus, there is no complex crime of rebellion with murder.

However, if the act of killing is for private purposes or profit, without any political motivation,
the same would be separately punished and would not be absorbed in the rebellion.