Rico, a hit man, positioned himself at the rooftop of a nearby building of a bank, to serve as a lookout for Red and Rod while the two were robbing the bank, as the three of them had previously planned. Ramiro, a policeman, responded to the reported robbery. Rico saw Ramiro and, to eliminate the danger of Red and Rod being caught, pulled the trigger of his rifle, intending to kill Ramiro. He missed as Ramiro slipped and fell down to the ground. Instead, a woman depositor who was coming out of the bank was fatally shot. After their apprehension, Rico, Red, and Rod were charged with the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. Rico’s defense was that he never intended to shoot and kill the woman, only Ramiro. Red and Rod’s defense was that they were not responsible for the death of the woman as they had no participation therein.
(a) Is Rico’s defense meritorious? (2.5%)
(b) Is Red and Rod’s defense meritorious? (2.5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(a) No, Rico's defense is not meritorious; and (b) Red and Rod's defense is likewise not meritorious.
Under Article 294(1) of the RPC, any killing on the occasion of robbery constitutes Robbery with Homicide, regardless of who is killed. Under Article 8 in relation to Article 17, in a conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all, making all robbers co-principals unless they tried to prevent the killing.
Here, Rico's shooting of the depositor on the occasion of the robbery renders him liable for Robbery with Homicide despite aberratio ictus. Since Red and Rod conspired with Rico to rob the bank, Rico's act is legally deemed their act, making them equally liable as co-principals.
Consequently, Rico, Red, and Rod are all criminally liable as co-principals for Robbery with Homicide.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What constitutes the special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294(1) of the RPC?
Any killing committed on the occasion or by reason of a robbery constitutes the special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide.
How does the doctrine of aberratio ictus affect liability in a charge of Robbery with Homicide?
Under aberratio ictus, an offender remains criminally liable for the resulting homicide committed on the occasion of robbery.
What is the legal effect of conspiracy on co-conspirators when a homicide is committed during a bank robbery?
In a conspiracy to commit robbery, all co-conspirators are liable as co-principals for any homicide committed on its occasion.
How may a co-conspirator in a robbery escape liability for a homicide committed by a co-conspirator?
A co-conspirator is liable for homicide during robbery unless he actively tried to prevent the killing.
Does the identity of the person killed alter the classification of Robbery with Homicide?
Robbery with Homicide is committed regardless of whether the person killed was a victim, officer, or bystander.
Learn more about these topics
1. Robbery with Homicide
Under Article 294, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, the special complex crime of robbery with homicide is committed whenever a killing occurs on the occasion or by reason of a robbery. It is immaterial whether the person killed was the victim of the robbery, a bystander, a responding police officer, or a co-conspirator, or whether the killing was accidental or intentional. So long as the homicide is committed on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, all co-conspirators in the robbery are held criminally liable as co-principals for the special complex crime.
2. Aberratio Ictus
Under Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. Under the doctrine of aberratio ictus, or mistake in the blow, an offender who fires a weapon at one person but accidentally hits and kills another remains fully liable for the resulting death. In robbery with homicide, a mistake in the blow does not negate or mitigate criminal liability, because any homicide committed during the robbery completes the special complex felony.
3. Conspirator Liability
Under Article 8 in relation to Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code, when a conspiracy to commit robbery is established, the act of one conspirator is legally deemed the act of all. Every participant in the conspiracy is held criminally liable as a co-principal for all acts committed by any co-conspirator on the occasion of the robbery. A co-conspirator can only escape liability for a homicide committed during the robbery if he performed an overt act to actively prevent or dissociate himself from the killing, which Red and Rod failed to do.