FACTS:

On the night of May 2, 2011, private complainant AAA was sleeping in her house together with her children, househelper and niece, when she was awakened at early dawn by the barking of the dog. FInding that there was no one inside their house, she went back to sleep. 

She was again awakened when a man wearing a mask touched her shoulder and poked a firearm at her neck. She recognized by his voice that it was the appellant Bringcula. Appellant declared robbery and ordered her to lie face down and was hogtied using a shoelace. 

The appellant took AAA’s two bracelets, wedding ring, and her money.

Appellant, thereafter, made AAA lie on her back and pulled her pajama and underwear. He also removed his own clothing including his mask. Appellant proceeded to have carnal knowledge of AAA against her will. After satisfying his lust, appellant dressed up and took AAA’s necklace and two cellular phones. 

An Information was filed, charging appellant with the crime of Robbery with Rape.

Appellant denied the allegations and interposed alibi as a defense. He claimed that in the evening of May 2, 2011, he was at home sleeping. His testimony was corroborated by his wife.

The trial court found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.

The CA affirmed the decision of the RTC.

Hence, this appeal.

ISSUE:

Whether appellant is guilty of the crime of Robbery with rape.

RULING:

The crime of Robbery with Rape is penalized under Article 294 of the RPC, as amended by Section 9 of R.A. No. 7659. Robbery with Rape is a special complex crime under Article 294 of the RPC. It contemplates a situation where the original intent of the accused was to take, with intent to gain, personal property belonging to another and rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime.

In People v. Evangelio, et al., this Court ruled that:

For a conviction of the crime of robbery with rape to stand, it must be shown that the rape was committed by reason or on the occasion of a robbery and not the other way around. This special complex crime under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code contemplates a situation where the original intent of the accused was to take, with intent to gain, personal property belonging to another and rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime. x x x

Thus, to be convicted of robbery with rape, the following elements must concur: 

(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 characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi; and 

(4) the robbery is accompanied by rape.

The RTC and the CA were correct in ruling that the elements of robbery with rape are present in this case.

As ruled by the CA:

Having established that the personal properties of the [victim were] unlawfully taken by the appellant, intent to gain was sufficiently proven.

The prosecution was also able to establish, based on AAA’s testimony, that the robbery preceded the crime of rape and that the latter crime was an incident to the original intent of the appellant to rob AAA.