Introduction

The Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines, enacted as Act No. 3815 in 1930 and amended over the years, provides a comprehensive framework for classifying and penalizing crimes, including robbery. Robbery, defined under Article 293, is a crime against property involving the taking of personal property belonging to another with intent to gain, through violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things. The RPC recognizes that felonies, including robbery, can exist in various stages of execution: attempted, frustrated, and consummated. These stages determine the degree of criminal liability and the corresponding penalties, reflecting the principle that punishment should be proportionate to the act's completion and harm caused.

This article exhaustively explores the stages of robbery under the RPC in the Philippine context. It examines the general principles of felony stages from Article 6, their specific application to robbery, the elements required for each stage, penalties under Articles 294-302, aggravating and mitigating circumstances, relevant provisions on conspiracy and proposal, and key jurisprudential interpretations. Understanding these stages is crucial for legal practitioners, as misclassification can affect prosecution, defense, and sentencing. The RPC's approach balances retribution with prevention, ensuring that even incomplete acts posing societal risk are punishable.

General Principles of Felony Stages in the RPC

Article 6 of the RPC delineates the stages of felonies committed by positive acts:

Consummated Felony: Occurs when all elements necessary for execution and accomplishment are present. The crime is fully realized, and the intended result is achieved.
Frustrated Felony: Exists when the offender performs all acts of execution that would produce the felony, but it is not consummated due to causes independent of the offender's will. The crime reaches the brink of completion but fails for external reasons.
Attempted Felony: Takes place when the offender commences the commission directly by overt acts but does not perform all acts of execution due to spontaneous desistance or causes independent of their will. Only initial steps are taken, without reaching full execution.

These stages apply to robbery as a felony, but not to light felonies (punishable only when consummated, per Article 7) or crimes by omission. For robbery, the stages hinge on the taking of property and the use of violence, intimidation, or force. Preparatory acts (e.g., planning) are generally not punishable unless they constitute a separate crime, such as conspiracy in robbery under Article 8.

Article 10 emphasizes that the RPC provisions are supplementary to special laws, but for robbery, the RPC is primary unless modified (e.g., by Republic Act No. 10951, adjusting property values for penalties in 2017).

Elements of Robbery and Their Relation to Stages

Robbery's basic elements under Article 293 are:

Taking of personal property.
Property belongs to another.
Intent to gain.
Violence against or intimidation of persons, or force upon things.

Robbery is classified into two main types:

Robbery with Violence or Intimidation (Articles 294-298): Involves harm to persons.
Robbery with Force Upon Things (Articles 299-302): Involves breaking into buildings or structures.

The stage depends on how far these elements are fulfilled. For instance, the "taking" must be unlawful and with animus lucrandi (intent to gain). Jurisprudence, such as in People v. Dio (G.R. No. L-36464, 1983), clarifies that asportation (carrying away) is essential for consummation, but partial taking may suffice in certain contexts.

Consummated Robbery

Consummated robbery occurs when the offender successfully takes and carries away the property using the requisite means, achieving the intent to gain without interruption.

Key Characteristics: All elements are present, and the crime produces its natural consequences. For violence/intimidation type, if committed in an inhabited house or with homicide, penalties escalate (Article 294). For force upon things, entry via breaking walls, roofs, etc., consummates the act upon taking (Article 299).
Examples: Entering a home, threatening occupants, and fleeing with valuables consummates the crime. In People v. Jaranilla (G.R. No. L-28547, 1974), the Court held that even momentary possession by the robber consummates robbery if asportation occurs.
Penalties: Vary by circumstances:
- Simple robbery: Prision mayor (6 years and 1 day to 12 years).
- With homicide: Reclusion perpetua to death (amended by RA 9346 banning death penalty).
- In uninhabited places or by a band: Higher degrees.
- Adjusted for property value under RA 10951 (e.g., if value exceeds P500,000, reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua).

Aggravating circumstances (e.g., nighttime, band under Article 14) increase penalties by one degree.

Frustrated Robbery

Frustrated robbery arises when the offender executes all acts necessary to commit robbery, but the crime is not consummated due to external causes independent of their will, such as intervention by third parties or the victim's resistance preventing complete taking.

Key Characteristics: The offender must have performed all execution acts (e.g., violence applied, property grasped), but consummation fails externally. Unlike attempts, the subjective phase (internal decision) and objective phase (external acts) are complete, but the result is thwarted.
Distinction from Consummated: If any asportation occurs, it may be consummated even if the robber is immediately apprehended. In People v. Salvilla (G.R. No. 86163, 1989), the Court ruled frustration when robbers held hostages and demanded money but were arrested before escaping, as taking was complete but gain not fully realized—wait, actually, jurisprudence varies; some cases treat such as consummated if possession is established.
Examples: A robber breaks into a house, subdues the owner, collects items, but is stopped by police before leaving—frustrated if no asportation beyond the premises.
Penalties: One degree lower than consummated (Article 51). For example, frustrated robbery with homicide: Reclusion temporal (12 years and 1 day to 20 years).

Jurisprudence emphasizes that for frustration, the felony must not be produced "by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator" (Article 6). In robbery, if the offender abandons due to fear, it may revert to attempt.

Attempted Robbery

Attempted robbery involves overt acts directly commencing the crime, but not all execution acts are performed, due to desistance or external intervention.

Key Characteristics: The acts must be unequivocal and directly linked to robbery, beyond mere preparation. For instance, arming oneself and approaching a victim with intent is attempted if stopped early.
Distinction from Frustrated: In attempts, the offender has not completed all acts; the crime is in the incipient stage. No wounding or taking yet, but intent is manifest.
Examples: Brandishing a weapon and demanding property, but fleeing upon alarm without taking anything. In People v. Lizada (G.R. No. 143468-71, 2003), pointing a gun and announcing robbery was attempted when interrupted before violence or taking.
Penalties: Two degrees lower than consummated (Article 51). For attempted simple robbery: Arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months) to prision correccional (6 months and 1 day to 6 years).

Voluntary desistance (Article 6) exempts liability if before all acts are done and no other crime is committed.

Conspiracy and Proposal in Robbery Stages

Under Article 8, conspiracy exists when two or more persons agree to commit robbery and decide to act. If conspiracy is proven, all are liable as principals, regardless of stage.

Proposal: Suggesting robbery to another is punishable only in cases like treason or rebellion, not robbery.
Impact on Stages: Conspirators are liable for the achieved stage; if one consummates, all may be, per People v. Peralta (G.R. No. L-19069, 1968).

In brigandage (Article 306), a special form of robbery by bands, stages apply similarly, but penalties are higher.

Aggravating, Mitigating, and Alternative Circumstances

Stages interact with circumstances under Articles 13-15:

Mitigating (e.g., minority) may lower penalties further.
Aggravating (e.g., cruelty in violence) raise them, but cannot exceed maximum for the stage.
Alternative (e.g., intoxication) depend on context.

Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act No. 4103, as amended) applies, setting minimum and maximum terms based on stage.

Special Considerations and Related Provisions

Complex Crimes: Robbery with homicide/rape (Article 294) is complex; stages apply to the robbery component, but homicide consummates the whole if death occurs.
Accessories and Accomplices: Liable in degrees lower, regardless of stage (Articles 52-53).
Amnesty/Pardon: May apply post-conviction.
Juvenile Offenders: Under RA 9344, stages considered but with suspended sentences.
Amendments: RA 10951 updated penalties based on value, affecting all stages (e.g., theft vs. robbery thresholds).

Jurisprudential Developments

Supreme Court rulings refine stages:

Baleros v. People (G.R. No. 138033, 2006): Attempted when acts are equivocal.
People v. Campa (G.R. No. L-28788, 1968): Frustrated if taking incomplete due to arrest.
People v. Dio: Emphasizes asportation for consummation.

Courts stress evidence of intent and acts for classification.

Practical Implications and Defenses

Prosecutors must prove stage beyond reasonable doubt. Defenses include alibi, lack of intent, or misclassification (e.g., arguing theft instead of robbery if no violence).

Victims can file civil actions concurrently (Article 100), recovering damages irrespective of stage.

Law enforcement trains on identifying stages for proper charging.

Conclusion

The stages of robbery under the Philippine Revised Penal Code—attempted, frustrated, and consummated—provide a graduated system of liability, ensuring proportionate justice. Rooted in Articles 6 and 293-306, these stages account for the offender's actions, intent, and external factors, with penalties scaled accordingly. Jurisprudence and amendments like RA 10951 continually shape application, emphasizing protection of property and persons. Comprehensive grasp of these concepts is indispensable for upholding the rule of law in addressing one of the most common crimes in the Philippines.