COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.

LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
Trial plan

Case theory
What is Robbery with Homicide?

Robbery with Homicide is a special complex crime against property. Homicide

is incidental to the Robbery which is the main purpose of the criminal.

What are the elements in the commission of this crime?

The elements in the commission of the crime of Robbery with Homicide are
the following:

1. The taking of personal property with the use of violence against or

intimidation or persons;

2. The property belongs to another;

3. The taking is characterized with animus lucrandi; and

4. On the occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, the crime of homicide,

which is used in the generic sense, was committed.

(People v. Cavina, G.R. No. 118076. November 20, 1996)

What is the main purpose of the criminal in the case of Robbery with
Homicide?

The purpose of the offender must be to commit robbery and the homicide is
committed on the occasion of the robbery which means that even if the
homicide is committed before, during or after the robbery, as long as it is
related to the robbery, robbery with homicide is committed.
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
When the primordial criminal intent is to commit a robbery and in the course of
the robbery, there is a special complex crime of robbery with homicide. The
primary criminal intent being to commit a robbery, any killing on the “occasion”
of the robbery, though not by reason thereof, is considered a component of
the crime of robbery with homicide as a single indivisible offense.

That the defendant did not commit the crime charged against him, several
elements of the said special complex crime was missing . The said crime
couldn’t have even be the purpose of our client upon taking the said jewelry,
nor he committed the said act of kill after the alleged theft.

In this case , the conflicting statements of Mr. Lee and Ms. See as opposed to
that of Mr. Dee about the how they got into the place, Mr Lee and Ms. See
claiming that the door was locked thus having to resort to the use of spare
keys to get in, while Mr. Dee on the other hand, claiming that he entered the
said house easily because after he knew that no one was answering he went
inside since the door was unlocked.

Our defense would that be of, in connection to the chain of how the events
transpired, in relation to that of the dashcam footage, in case it would be
admitted as evidence in court, is that , there would be inadequate time for Mr.
Dee to kill Mr See, take the jewelry and lock the door of the said house. Also
given the time where the employer tasked Mr. Dee to come to the victim’s
place, and that of Mr. Dee’s travel time from his point of origin to the house of
Mr. See will further diminish the possible time that he will be in the house of
Mr. See. This is also to be proven by the dashcam recording wherein the
Police officers stated that it took only several minutes from the time Mr Dee
entered the said place and the time he got out. It should also be noted that
since, Mr. Dee was not a person familiar to the said place, since he just went
there for a service, he called out for the victim’s house for several minutes,
thus , further shortening the period he can consume; this can also be proven
by the dashcam recording.

To emphasize the earlier point, that of the act accused against Mr. Dee, when
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
it be a robbery it would mean that there would most likely be a moment of
struggle against Mr. See and Mr. Dee, that which cannot be proved by the
time frame to be revealed by the said dashcam recording.

Since, our client was scared that he will be accused as the one who
perpetrated the killing of the victim, he did not report the said crime
immediately to the police, this was an automatic response of a person also
afraid of his person and the threat to his liberty since he was formerly a
person deprived of liberty. In opposition to the statements of Mr. Lee and Ms.
See wherein if that would be true , there could be an employment of evident
premeditation, since if there would be a reliance to their said statements, it
would be presumed that Mr. Dee wouldve even locked the door , thus
delaying the discovery of the victim’s lifeless body, which we , as the defense
denies, mainly on the basis of the “would-be” established time frame to be
revealed by the dashcam footage.

TO this end , it would be seeming impossible to prove the elements of the

crime of robbery with homicide , thus moving to dismiss the same claim for
lack of cause of action against our client.

Jurisprudence
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.

Commission of — Elements of the special complex crime of robbery with

homicide are: (1) the taking of personal property belonging to another; (2) with
intent to gain; (3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; and
(4) on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as
used in its generic sense, was committed. (People vs. Sulayao, G.R. No.
198952, Sept. 06, 2017)

The prosecution is burdened to prove the confluence of the following

elements: (1) the taking of personal property is committed with violence or
intimidation against persons; (2) the property taken belongs to another; (3) the
taking is animo lucrandi; and (4) by reason of the robbery or on the occasion
thereof, homicide is committed. (People vs. Layug, G.R. No. 223679, Sept.
27, 2017)

 What is crucial for a conviction for the crime of robbery with homicide is for
the prosecution to firmly establish the offender’s intent to take personal
property before the killing, regardless of the time when the homicide is
actually carried out; here, there was no showing of accused-appellant’s
intention to commit robbery; where the evidence does not conclusively prove
the robbery, the killing of the victim would be classified either as a simple
homicide or murder, depending upon the absence or presence of any
qualifying circumstance, and not the crime of robbery with homicide.
(People vs. Domasig, G.R. No. 217028, June 13, 2018)

 Elements in order to be convicted of robbery with homicide: 1. the taking of

personal property with the use of violence or intimidation against the person;
2. the property taken belongs to another; 3. the taking is characterized by
intent to gain or animus lucrandi; and, 4. on the occasion of the robbery or by
reason thereof the crime of homicide was committed; it is necessary that the
robbery itself be proved as conclusively as any other essential element of the
crime. (People vs.Madrelejos, G.R. No. 225328, March 21, 2018)

 It is necessary that the robbery itself be proven as conclusively as any other
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
essential element of the crime; it must be established that a robbery has
actually taken place and that, as a consequence or on the occasion of
robbery, a homicide be committed; for robbery to apply, there must be taking
of personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by means of
violence against or intimidation of any person or by using force upon things; in
this case, the element of taking, as well as the existence of the money alleged
to have been lost and stolen by accused-appellant, was not adequately
established. (People vs. Domasig, G.R. No. 217028, June 13, 2018)

Elements —The elements of simple robbery are: a) that there is personal

property belonging to another; b) that there is unlawful taking of that property;
c) that the taking is with intent to gain; and d) that there is violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things; taking, when considered
complete. (People vs. Avancena, G.R. No. 200512, June 07, 2017)
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
Presentation of witnesses/Cross Examination

In this case first, as a counsel, I will introduce myself formally before the judge
and the court

Then we the defense will formally offer the said testimony of the witnesses as
evidence before the honorable court.

The first witness that we will introduce is our client , Mr. Dee
 Sample questions : (Questions labeled as “Q”)
 Q - Who are you and how are you related to the victim?
 Q - How did your employer contacted you?
 Q - What time did you arrive on the said address?
 Q - When you came in did you notice anyone present in the
area?
 Q - Were you welcomed to enter the said house? (A - No)
 Q - Then , why did you entered the same ? ( Because the
door was unlocked )
 Q - Upon entering what did you first see?
 Q - When you saw the victim, does he shows sign of life? (e.g.
movement , noise perhaps?
 Q - Did you panicked? (yes)
 Q - Did you do any attempts to help the victim?
 Q - What other things have you seen aside from the victim’s
body ?
 Q - These articles, what are they?
 Q - Upon seeing these jewelry you mentioned, where are they
placed when you found them ?
 Q - What did you do (collected them) ? , Why? (in dire need of
money)
 Q - After you collected the jewelry, where did you place
them ?
 Q - After taking hold of the jewelry what did you do ?
 Q - After going outside the house did you noticed anyone
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
seeing you leave the premises?
 Q - Where did you go after you leave the house?
 (Last Question) Q - How many minutes did it take you from
entering the said premises and leaving the scene afterwards?

We will call the 2nd witness, Since the statement of Mr Lee only corroborate
that of Mrs. See, we will interview only Ms. See.
 Sample Questions : Mrs. See

 Q - Who are you and how are you related to the victim?
 Q - Where do you live? Do you live in the same place with the
victim?
 Q - Do you habitually go to you son’s residence?
 Q - Both of you and Mr See has duplicates for Mr. See’s
house lock , right?
 Q - (in connection to previous question) Since , he was your
son, why not just go straight in, instead of using the doorbell?

 (Alternate question if answer is different in Q4)The spare
keys, do you carry the same, or was there just a container of
the same near the door?
 Q - After ringing the doorbell three times what did you do ?
 Q - After entering the place, did you notice something
unusual?
 Q - Upon finding the body, what did you see ?
 Q - Did you saw anything that might have caused the death of
the victim? (Y/N?)
 Q - Upon stating that the victim’s blood was scattered in the
floor, did you notice any blood trail of kind , other than that of
the victim?
 Q - In the surroundings where the body was found, did you
noticed anything out of place?
 Q - After confirming that the victim was already lifeless, what
did you do ?
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
 Q - What was Mr. Lee, your companion going to the victim’s
house, doing ?
 Q What time did you call for the police officers?
 (Last Question) Q - Upon arrival what did the officers do?

3rd witness : POLICE OFFICER/S

 Sample questions
 Who are you, and how are you involved in this proceeding?
 Where were you stationed? What district or office?
 In case of similar situations, are you the ones tasked to
immediately respond at the scene where a crime ensued?
 What time did you arrived at the scene?
 How many were you who responded in the scene?
 Upon arrival what did you notice?
 Who did you interview first after cordoning the place?
 After several testimonies were taken, what did you do next?
 The dashcam footage, did you noticed it or was it the neighbor
who presented the same to you?
 Upon review of the footage, how did you identify the person in
the said video?
 What were the next steps you took after identification of the
said persona?

The 4th witness that we will be presenting will be that of the doctor who
examined the body?

After formally introducing him to the court and formally offering his testimony
as an evidence, we will call him to sit on the witness stand

 Sample Question : Expert Witness (DOCTOR)

 Tell us something about your self (Personal Information)
 Are you qualified to be the expert witness for this case? (Tells
credentials and school attended, year when he acquired
COMPETENTE, Juvit Jr. G.
LEGAL COUNSELING AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
LAW - 3B. Final Examination.
license, and years of practice)
 When did you examine the body?
 Upon examination, how long was the victim dead, before the
police arrived at the scene (estimate time)
 What was the cause of death ? (e.g loss of blood )
 What was the kind of weapon used? (based on the wound of
the victim)
 Where was the pool of blood concentrated?
 Was there any signs of struggle by the victim? ( bruises,
scratches, marks? )
 Based on the trajectory of the wound ? How do you think the
victim was stabbed?
 Are there any pieces of the evidence of identification that is
other than that of the victim (e.g fiber, footstep marks, strands
of hair ;DNA)
 Based on the surrounding circumstances , how long will it take
to commence the said act of killing ?
 (Last Question) Is a single stab enough to stop the movement
of the victim? and eventually lead to his death without having
any chances of shouting for help or rescue?