G.R. No.

95756 May 14, 1993

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
CRISOLOGO EMPACIS, accused-appellant.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Antonio A. Almirante, Jr. for accused-appellant.

FACTS: On evening of Sept 16, 1986, as victim Fidel Saromines and his Wife
Camila were about to close their small store in Cebu, 2 men, Romualdo Langomez
and Crisologo Empacis, came and asked to buy some sardines and rice. After they
finished eating, Langomez told Fidel to sell him some cigarettes. He then
announced a hold-up and ordered Fidel to give up his money. The latter started to
hand him PhP12K but suddenly decided to fight to keep it. A struggle followed in
the course of which Langomez stabbed Fidel about three times. Empacis joined in
and with his own knife also stabbed Fidel. At this time, gunshots were heard
outside the house. It was only when Peter, Fidel’s 13-yr old son, saw his father
fighting for his life and rushed to his father’s defense with a pinuti (a long bolo)
striking Empacis and inflicting 2 wounds on him did the 2 men flee. Fidel died
from the fatal injuries, which penetrated his lungs and heart. Empacis went to the
clinic of Dr Eustaquio for the treatment of his wounds inflicted by Peter. He told
the doctor that he was assaulted without warning by a young man near the Papan
Market.

The next day, police officers went looking for a man who might have been treated
for wounds from a bladed weapon. They came to Dr Eustaquio’s clinic who told
them about Empacis. He was found at the public market taking breakfast & there
they arrested him. He admitted going to the store of Fidel but denied having joined
Langomez in his attack. He asserts that he tried to stop him but the latter
succeeded in stabbing Fidel. He further alleges that he was brought by his
neighbors to the clinic. The other 2 men, who were accused of firing the gun from
outside, denied any participation in the crime. They were both absolved by the
court. Langomez disappeared and could not be found.
ISSUE:

Whether or not the aggravating circumstance of craft, fraud or disguise be

appreciated in the case.

HELD:

The Court finds the accused Crisologo Empacis guilty of robbery with homicide as
defined and penalized under Article 294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code, and
considering the attendance of the four generic aggravating circumstances of
dwelling, nighttime, craft or fraud and superior strength, not offset by any
mitigating or extenuating circumstance, hereby sentences the said accused
Crisologo Empacis to the supreme penalty of death.