Republic v. Sarabia; G.R. No. 157847; 25 August 2005.

Facts: Sometime in 1956, the petitioner took possession and control of the substantial portion of the
lot owned by the private respondents. The occupied portion was used as an airport parking area and
in time, several structures were erected on it.
n 199!, petitioner filed an action for the e"propriation of the entire lot. #owever, e"propriation
and writ of possession was granted only as to the actual portion occupied and not on its entirety.
Through the court$appointed commissioners% reports, the trial court fi"ed the &ust compensation for the
occupied portion at its current market value in 1999. The trial court fi"ed the &ust compensation based
on the current market value not at the time of the taking which was in 1956, but at the time of the
issuance of the writ of possession in 1999. To the trial court, the date of the issuance of the writ has to
be considered in fi"ing the &ust compensation because the same signified petitioner%s proper
ac'uisition and taking of the property which involves not only physical possession but also the legal
right to possess and own the same. () affirmed the trial court%s order.
ssue: The precise time at which &ust compensation should be fi"ed* whether as of the time of actual
taking of possession by the e"propriating entity, as insisted by petitioner, or at the issuance of the writ
of possession pursuant to the e"propriation proceedings, as maintained by the respondents and
sustained by both the trial court and the (ourt of )ppeals.
!el": (ompensation for property e"propriated must be determined as of the time the e"propriating
authority takes possession thereof and not as of the institution of the proceedings.
The value of the property should be fi"ed as of the date when it was taken and not the date of
the filing of the proceedings. +or where property is taken ahead of the filing of the condemnation
proceedings, the value thereof may be enhanced by the public purpose for which it is taken, the entry
by the plaintiff upon the property may have depreciated its value thereby, or, there may have been a
natural increase in the value of the property from the time it is taken to the time the complaint is filed,
due to general economic conditions. The owner of private property should be compensated only for
what he actually loses, it is not intended that his compensation shall e"tend beyond his loss or in&ury.
)nd what he loses is only the actual value of his property at the time it is taken. This is the only way
the compensation to be paid can be truly &ust, i.e., "just" not only to the individual whose property is
taken, "but to the public, which is to pay for it.
#$%#&$ vs. '%(#&) 244 S'RA 1*5
)ccused -arlo (ompil y .itaban filed a demurrer to evidence instead of presenting evidence in his behalf. The
trial court however denied his demurrer, admitted his e"tra&udicial confession, and found him guilty of robbery
with homicide. /ow before us, he maintains that his e"tra&udicial confession was e"tracted without the
assistance of counsel, thus constitutionally flawed.
FA'+S:
0n 12 0ctober 19!3, &ust before midnight, robbers struck on MJ Furnitures located along Tomas -apua Street,
Sta. (ru4, -anila, which doubled as the dwelling of its proprietors, the spouses -anuel and -ary 5ay. )nd
took off with some 625,777.77 in cash and pieces of &ewelry worth 627,777.77.
)fter noticing that the two 819 men guarding them had already left, They then rushed to the ground floor where
they saw -anuel sprawled on the floor among the pieces of furniture which were in disarray. #e succumbed to
thirteen 8129 stab wounds.
0n 13 0ctober 19!3, :6; agents together with Tomas 5ay, brother of the deceased, and 5enelyn <alle, onw
of the helpers went to the parish church of Tayabas, =ue4on, to look for >alta4ar -abini and his companions.
+rom the records of the parish they were able to confirm that suspect >alta4ar -abini stood as godfather in the
baptism of the child of his sister -amerta and ?ey .ope4. mmediately they proceeded to the house of .ope4
who informed them that >alta4ar -abini and his companions already left the day before, e"cept (ompil who
stayed behind and still planning to leave.
)fter being positively identified by 5enelyn <alle as one of the workers of the 5ay spouses, accused -arlo
(ompil who was lying on a couch was immediately frisked and placed under arrest. )ccording to 5enelyn,
(ompil turned pale, became speechless and was trembling. #owever after regaining his composure and upon
being interrogated, (ompil readily admitted his guilt and pointed to the arresting officers the perpetrators of the
heist from a picture of the baptism of the child of -abini@s sister. (ompil was then brought to the Tayabas
6olice Station where he was further investigated. 0n their way back to -anila, he was again 'uestioned. #e
confessed that shortly before midnight on 12 0ctober 19!3 he was with the group that robbed MJ Furnitures.
#e divulged to the police officers who his companions were and his participation as a lookout for which he
received 61,777.77. #e did not go inside the furniture shop since he would be recogni4ed. 0nly those who
were not known to their employers went inside. (ompil said that his cohorts stabbed -anuel 5ay to death. #e
also narrated that after the robbery, they all met in >angkal, -akati, in the house of one 6ablo 6akit, a brother
of his co$conspirator ?ogelio 6akit, where they shared the loot and drank beer until four$thirty in the morning.
Then they all left for =ue4on and agreed that from there they would all go home to their respective provinces.
+rom Tayabas, =ue4on, the arresting team together with accused (ompil proceeded to the house of 6ablo
6akit who confirmed that his younger brother ?ogelio, with some si" 869 others including (ompil, went to his
house past midnight on 12 0ctober 19!3 and divided among themselves the money and &ewelry which, as he
picked up from their conversation, was taken from Sta. (ru4, -anila. They drank beer until past four o@clock the
ne"t morning.
0n 1! 0ctober 19!3, the day following his arrest, accused (ompil after conferring with (.)0 lawyer -elencio
(laro4 and in the presence of his sister .eticia (ompil, brother 0rville (ompil and brother$in$law <irgilio
5acala, e"ecuted a sworn statement before (pl. 6atricio >alanay of the :6; admitting his participation in the
heist as a lookout. #e named the si" 869 other perpetrators of the crime as 5ose 5acale, >alta4ar -abini,
)mancio )lvos, ?ogelio 6akit, a certain ABrningA and one A.ando,A and asserted that he was merely forced to
&oin the group by 5ose 5acale and >alta4ar -abini who were the masterminds
0n 11 /ovember 19!3 an nformation for robbery with homicide was filed against -arlo (ompil. )ssisted by a
counsel de oficio he entered a plea of A/ot CuiltyA when arraigned. )fter the prosecution had rested, the
accused represented by counsel de parte instead of adducing evidence filed a demurrer to evidence.
0n 1 5une 19!! the ?egional Trial (ourt of -anila, >r. D9,
1
denied the demurrer, found the accused guilty of
robbery with homicide, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
n his 35$page appellant@s brief, accused (ompil claims that A8he9 was not apprised of his constitutional rights
8to remain silent and seek the assistance of counsel9 before the police officers started interrogating him from
the time of his arrest at the house of ?ey .ope4, then at the Tayabas 6olice Station, and while on their way to
-anila . . . . 8he9 was made to confess and declare statements that can be used against him in any
proceeding.A
2
)nd, the belated arrival of counsel from the (.)0 prior to the actual e"ecution of the written
e"tra&udicial confession did not cure the constitutional infirmity since the police investigators had already
e"tracted incriminatory statements from him the day before, which e"tracted statements formed part of his
alleged confession.
SSEB* :F/ the constitutional rights of the accused were violatedG
!$&,*
n the case at bench, it is evident that accused$appellant was immediately sub&ected to an interrogation upon
his arrest in the house of ?ey .ope4 in Tayabas, =ue4on. #e was then brought to the Tayabas 6olice Station
where he was further 'uestioned. )nd while on their way to -anila, the arresting agents again elicited
incriminating information. - all t.ree i-sta-ces) .e co-/esse" to t.e co00issio- o/ t.e cri0e a-"
a"0itte" .is participatio- t.erei-. - all t.ose i-sta-ces) .e 1as -ot assiste" b2 cou-sel.
The belated arrival of the (.)0 lawyer the following day even if prior to the actual signing of the uncounseled
confession does not cure the defect for the investigators were already able to e"tract incriminatory statements
from accused$appellant. +.e operative act) it .as bee- stresse") is 1.e- t.e police i-vestigatio- is -o
lo-ger a ge-eral i-3uir2 i-to a- u-solve" cri0e but .as begu- to /ocus o- a particular suspect 1.o
.as bee- ta4e- i-to custo"2 b2 t.e police to carr2 out a process o/ i-terrogatio- t.at le-"s itsel/ to
eliciti-g i-cri0i-ator2 state0e-ts) a-" -ot t.e sig-i-g b2 t.e suspect o/ .is suppose" e5tra6u"icial
co-/essio-.
:hat is more, it is highly improbable for (.)0 lawyer -elencio (laro4 to have fully e"plained to the accused
who did not even finish Crade 0ne, in less than ten 8179 minutes as borne by the records, the latter@s
constitutional rights and the conse'uences of subscribing to an e"tra&udicial confession.
7.ile t.e e5tra6u"icial co-/essio- o/ accuse"8appella-t is so co-vi-ci-g t.at it 0e-tio-s "etails 1.ic.
coul" -ot .ave bee- 0erel2 co-cocte") a-" 6ibes 1it. t.e ot.er pieces o/ evi"e-ce u-covere" b2 t.e
i-vestigators) still 1e ca--ot a"0it it i- evi"e-ce because o/ its i0plicit co-stitutio-al i-/ir0it2.
Nevert.eless) 1e /i-" ot.er su//icie-t /actual circu0sta-ces to prove .is guilt be2o-" reaso-able
"oubt.
- t.e i-sta-t case) t.e prosecutio- 1as able to prove t.e guilt o/ t.e accuse" through the following
circumstances* +irst, accused -arlo (ompil and >alta4ar -abini who are both from Samar worked in MJ
Furnitures in Sta. (ru4, -anila, and were familiar with the floor plan of the shop. Second, on the night of the
incident, they were seen in front of MJ Furnitures. Third, they were seen going to the rear of the furniture store.
+ourth, robbers forcibly entered MJ Furnitures through the back window on the second floor. +ifth, some two
819 hours after the commission of the crime, at around two o@clock the following morning, they were in a house
in >angkal, -akati, dividing between themselves and their five 859 other companions the money and &ewelry
taken from Sta. (ru4, -anila. Si"th, they all failed to show up for work the following day. Seventh, accuses
(ompil turned ashen, was trembling and speechless when apprehended in Tayabas, =ue4on, for a crime
committed in -anila. (ertainly these circumstances as gleaned from the factual findings of the trial court form
an unbroken chain which leads to a fair and reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused as one of the
perpetrators of the crime.
1*
!e-ce eve- "isregar"i-g accuse"8appella-t9s oral a-" 1ritte- co-/essio-s)
as 1e "o) still t.e prosecutio- 1as able to s.o1 t.at .e 1as a co8co-spirator i- t.e robber2 1it.
.o0ici"e.
7.ile it 0a2 be true t.at t.e arrest) searc. a-" sei:ure 1ere 0a"e 1it.out t.e be-e/it o/ a 1arra-t)
accuse"8appella-t is -o1 estoppe" /ro0 3uestio-i-g t.is "e/ect a/ter /aili-g to 0ove /or t.e 3uas.i-g
o/ t.e i-/or0atio- be/ore t.e trial court. +.us a-2 irregularit2 atte-"a-t to .is arrest 1as cure" 1.e-
.e volu-taril2 sub0itte" .i0sel/ to t.e 6uris"ictio- o/ t.e trial court b2 e-teri-g a plea o/ ;-ot guilt2;
a-" b2 participati-g i- t.e trial.
14
The argument of accused$appellant that the trial court should have convicted the arresting police officers of
arbitrary detention, if not delay in the delivery of detained persons, is misplaced. Suffice it to say that the law
enforcers who arrested him are not being charged and prosecuted in the case at bench.
:#B?B+0?B, the ;ecision of the ?egional Trial (ourt appealed from is )++?-B; insofar as it finds
accused$appellant -)?.0 (0-6. y .T)>)/ guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide.