Napoli vs CA

Facts:

At around 1 am in the morning of Oct 1, 1956 in Hermosa, Bataan, Mrs. Peñaflor, answering a call of
nature, heard dog barks indicating that there were strangers nearby in the vicinity. Acting upon her
instincts, she woke up her husband named Ignacio Peñaflor who in turn, got his flashlight and his gun
and went into the store of her wife. As he approached the store, the door was forcibly opened by 4 men,
one of them holding a machine gun. After Ignacio Peñaflor fired and missed a shot, he received a blow
on his head but didn’t lost consciousness and instead pretended to be dead while being hogtied. The 4
men then went up to the house and demanded from Mrs. Peñaflor money and the latter complied with
the demands. The 4 men then subsequently hogtied Mrs. Peñaflor and two of her sons and left. The
spouses thereafter called for help and the robbery was reported to the authorities. The chief of police of
Hermosa, Delfin Lapid, testified that he went to the premises and it appeared that the robbers bore a
hole on the sidewall of the ground floor of the store and passed through it to gain entrance. Shortly
after the occurrence, a criminal complaint for robbery in band was filed against the defendants. The
Court of First Instance of Bataan convicted defendants Napolis, Malana, and Satimbre and subsequently
affirmed by the Court of Appeals in toto.

Issue:

Whether the penalty to be imposed upon the convicts under Art. 299 of RPC should be reduced to that
of imposed under Art. 294 of RPC.

Held:

The Court held that in addition to the robbery in an inhabited house under Art. 299, the convicts have
also employed violence upon the person of Mr. Ignacio Peñaflor and intimidation on Mrs. Peñaflor in
violation of Art. 294 and that the latter is graver than the former. However, the Court is unable to agree
that since Art. 294 is a crime graver than Art. 299, the penalty under the former provision should be
imposed rather than the latter one considering that the penalty imposed in Art. 294 is much lighter than
what is imposed under Art. 299. The Court also held that Art. 294 applies only where robbery with
violence against or intimidation of person takes place without entering an inhabited house, under the
conditions set forth in Art. 299. The Court held the crime committed was that of a complex one
considering that the elements of both provisions in question were present and subsequently increased
the penalty imposed by CA to the convicts.