People vs. Empacis (G.R. No.

95756 May 14, 1993)

Article 14 Paragraph 14, Craft, Fraud or Disguise be employed
FACTS:
At about 9PM 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 w/c Langomez stabbed Fidel about 3x. Empacis joined in and w/ his own knife also stabbed Fidel. At this time, gunshots
were heard outside the house. It was only when Peter, Fidels 13-yr old son, saw his father fighting for his life and rushed to
his fathers defense w/ a pinuti (a long bolo) striking Empacis and inflicting 2 wounds on him did the 2 men flee. Fidel died
from the fatal injuries, w/c 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 w/o 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 Eustaquios 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 & could not be found.
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.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the aggravating circumstance of craft, fraud or disguise be appreciated in the case.
HELD:
The aggravating circumstance of craft or fraud 23 was properly appreciated against Empacis. He and Romualdo pretended to
be bona fide customers of the victim's store and on his pretext gained entry into the latter's store and later, into another part
of his dwelling. This Court has held stratagems and ruses of this sort to constitute the aggravating circumstance of fraud or
craft, e.g: where the accused
a) pretended to be constabulary soldiers and by that ploy gained entry into the residence of their prey whom they thereafter
robbed and killed;
b) pretended to be needful of medical treatment, and through this artifice, entered the house of the victim whom they
thereupon robbed and killed;
c) pretended to be wayfarers who had lost their way and by this means gained entry into a house, in which they then
perpetrated the crime of robbery with homicide;
d) pretended to be customer wanting to buy a bottle of wine;
e) pretended to be co-passengers of the victim in a public utility vehicle;
f) posed as customers wishing to buy cigarettes; and as being thristy, asking for drink of water.