Robbery With Violence Against Or Intimidation Of Persons



1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, homicide is committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied w/ rape or intentional mutilation
   or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the physical
   injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency, or
   blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason of or on occasion of the robbery, serious physical
   injuries resulting in the loss of the use of speech, or the power
   to hear or to smell, or the loss of an eye, hand, foot, arm,
   leg, or the loss of the use of any such member or incapacity for
   work in w/c victim is habitually engaged is inflicted;
5. If the violence / intimidation employed in committing the robbery
   shall have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the crime;
6. When in the course of its execution, offender inflicts upon any
   person not responsible for the commission of robbery any of the
   physical injuries resulting to deformity, loss of any part of the
   body or the use thereof, or illness or incapacity for the performance
   of the work for > 90 days or > 30 days;
7. If the violence employed does not cause any serious physical injuries
   defined in Art. 263, or if offender employs intimidation only


1. Robbery with homicide is committed if original design is robbery and
   homicide was committed although homicide precedes the robbery by an
   appreciable time. If original design is not robbery  but robbery was
   committed after homicide as an afterthought, offender committed 2
   separate offenses of robbery and homicide. The crime is still robbery
   with homicide if the person killed was an innocent bystander and not
   the person robbed and even if the death supervened by mere accident.

2. In robbery with rape, the intent to commit robbery must precede rape.
   Prosecution of the crime need not be by the offended party and the
   fiscal can sign the information. When rape and homicide co-exist in
   a robbery, rape should be considered as aggravating only and the
   crime is still robbery with homicide.

3. Robbery with intimidation is committed when the acts done by the
   accused, by their own nature or by reason of the circumstances,
   inspire fear in the person against whom the acts are directed.

The crime defined in this article is a special complex crime.

The violence must be against the person of the offended party, not
upon the thing taken. It must be present before the taking of personal
property is complete.

Exception: When the violence results in:
   (1) homicide,
   (2) rape,
   (3) intentional mutilation, or
   (4) any of the serious physical injuries penalized in paragraphs 1
       & 2 of Art. 263,

   - the taking of personal property is robbery complexed with any of
     those crimes under Art. 294,
   - even if the taking was already complete when the violence was used
     by the offender.

There is no crime as robbery with murder.

The crime is still robbery with homicide if, in the course of the
robbery, a person was killed even if it was another robber or a bystander.

Even if the rape was committed in another place, it is still robbery
with rape.

When the taking of personal property of a woman is an independent act
following defendant’s failure to consummate the rape, there are two
distinct crimes committed: attempted rape and theft.

Additional rapes committed on the same occasion of robbery will not
increase the penalty.

When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of robbery, the crime
is robbery with homicide, the rape to be considered as an aggravating
circumstance only.

Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal property grave
coercion if there is violence used (Art. 286).

PEOPLE vs. COMILING, G.R. No. 140405. 3/4/04
As correctly stressed by the Solicitor General, robbery with homicide
is a “special complex crime.” It is enough that in order to sustain a
conviction for this crime, the killing, which is designated as “homicide,”
has a direct relation to the robbery, regardless of whether the latter
takes place before or after the killing. For as long as the killing
occurs during or because of the heist, even if the killing is merely
accidental, robbery with homicide is committed.

PEOPLE vs. BOLINGET, G.R. Nos. 137949-52. 12/11/03
Well entrenched in this jurisprudence is the doctrine that when
homicide takes place as a consequence or on occasion a robbery, all
those who took part in the robbery are guilty as principals in the
special complex crime of robbery with homicide, even if they did not
actually took part in the homicide. The only exception is when it is
clearly shown that the accused endeavored to prevent the unlawful killing.

PEOPLE vs. HIJADA, G.R. No. 123696. 311/04
   There is no crime of Robbery with Multiple Homicide under the Revised
   Penal Code. The crime is Robbery with Homicide notwithstanding the
   number of homicides committed on the occasion of the robbery and even
   if murder, physical injuries and rape were also committed on the
   same occasion.

   1. If both violence/intimidation of persons (294) and force upon
      things(299/302) exist it will be considered as violation of
      Art 294 because it is more serious than in Art 299/302.
   2. BUT when robbery is under Art 294 par 4 & 5 the penalty is
      lower than in Art 299 so the complex crime should be imputed
      for the higher penalty to be imposed without sacrificing the
      principle that robbery w/ violence against persons is more
      severe than that w/ force upon things

   When taking of victims gun was to prevent the victim from retaliating
   crimes are theft and homicide not robbery w/homicide


Popular posts from this blog

Criminology Board Exam Reviewer Question Answer

SSS Paternity Leave Benefits

Personal Identification Reviewer