Compilation of 2014 Jurisprudence in Criminal Procedure

8/9/2019 Compilation of 2014 Jurisprudence in Criminal Procedure

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/compilation-of-2014-jurisprudence-in-criminal-procedure 1/98

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Baguio City

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 203605 April 23, 2014

P/C INSP. LAWRENCE . CA!IPE, P/C INSP. !OELL. MEN"O#A, P/C INSP.GERAR"O . ALATUCAN, PO3 !OLITO P. MAMANAO, !R., P03 $ERNAN"O

RE%S. GAPU#, PO2 E"UAR"O G. LANCO, PO2 E"WIN SANTOS &'( PO1

!OSIL RE% I. LUCENA, Petitioners,

s!

PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Respon"ent!

D # C I S I O N

AA", J.:

$s narrate" by the Court of $ppeals %C$&, on 'uly (), (**+ ilian I! De Vera %ilian&

file" a co-plaint before the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'& charging .ith -ultiple

-ur"er the follo.ing Philippine National Police %PNP& officers connecte" . ith the PNP

High.ay Patrol /roup %HP/&0 petitioners P1C Insp! a.rence B! Ca2ipe, P1C Insp!

'oel ! 3en"o4a, P1C Insp! /erar"o B! Balatucan, PO5 'olito P! 3a-anao, 'r!, P*5

6ernan"o Rey S! /apu4, PO( #"uar"o /! Blanco, P*( #".in Santos, an" PO7 'osil

Rey I! ucena %collectiely, petitioner HP/ officers&! The other HP/ -e-bers .ere

P1C Supt! Perfecto Pala" an" P1C Supt! #leuterio /utierre4, 'r! $nother group of

accuse" consiste" of police officers fro- the PNP Special $ction 6orce %S$6&! 7

In her co-plaint ilian allege" that 2oint ele-ents of the S$6 an" the HP/ conspire"

in carrying out a plan to 8ill her husban", $lfonso 9'un9 S! De Vera %'un& an" their

:;year;ol" "aughter, ia $llana! ilian sai" that at aroun" +05* p!-! on Dece-ber <,

(**) she calle" 'un to tell hi- that she .as on her .ay to Pasay City to -eet hi-an" their "aughter! She got to Pasay City but the t.o "i" not sho. up! $fter an

hour, ilian calle" their house helper .ho assure" her that 'un an" ia ha" alrea"y

left! ilian trie" calling 'un but she got no ans.er! She again calle" their house

helper, .ho infor-e" her that there ha" been a shootout in their sub"iision!(

ilian "eci"e" to go ho-e! =hen she arrie" at the entrance of their sub"iision,

the police ha" bloc8e" the area an" "i" not allo. ciilians to pass through! She got

a call fro- her house helper .ho tol";her that 'un an" ia ha" been inole" in the

shootout! $ certain Hilario In"iana approache" ilian an" a"ise" her to go to the

hospital .here ia ha" been rushe"! =hen she got there, she learne" that ia ha"

"ie" of gunshot .oun" on the hea"! 'un .as foun" "ea" near a passenger 2eepney

.ith a gunshot .oun" on his hea"!5

=itnesses to the shootout sai" that 'un an" ia .ere ri"ing in his Isu4u Cross.in"

an .hen police officers .earing Regional S$6 ests su""enly fire" at the an! 'un

got out, .ent to the passenger si"e, an" trie" to carry ia out to safety as she ha"

been .oun"e"! The police officers .ent after 'un, ho.eer, an" shot hi- on the

hea"!

On Dece-ber (), (**+ the DO' issue" a resolution after preli-inary inestigation

fin"ing probable cause to in"ict all the police officers inole" in the police action

that le" to the shooting of 'un an" ia for t.o counts of -ur"er! On 3arch 7<, (*7*

the DO' file" the infor-ation before the Regional Trial Court %RTC& of Parafia>ue City

in Cri-inal Cases 7*;*()* an" 7*;*()7! On the follo.ing "ay, 3arch 7?, petitioner

HP/ officers file" an o-nibus -otion for 2u"icial "eter-ination of probable cause

.ith a prayer to hol" in abeyance the issuance of the .arrants for their arrest! They

also sought the annul-ent of the DO' resolution on the groun" of iolation of their

constitutional rights! 6urther, they as8e" that the infor-ation be >uashe" on the

groun" that the facts it allege" "i" not constitute an offense!@

On 'une 7?, (*7* the RTC "is-isse" the case against petitioner HP/ officers for

lac8 of probable cause against the-, gien that the .itnesses -a"e no -ention of

seeing anyone fro- the HP/ group ta8ing part in the shooting an" 8illing of 'un an"

his "aughter! Instea", the RTC foun" that the ei"ence ten"s to sho. that petitioner

HP/ officers .ere re>ueste" an" acte" -erely as bloc8ing force in a legiti-ate

police operation an" ilian ha" not refute" this! On the other han" the R TC issue"

an arrest .arrant for the accuse" S$6 officers, haing foun" probable cause against

the-! ilian -oe" for reconsi"eration of the "is-issal or"er coering petitioner

HP/ officers but the RTC "enie" the sa-e on Septe-ber (@, (*7*!<

On 'anuary (7, (*77 the Office of the Solicitor /eneral %OS/& file" a petition for

certiorari un"er Rule ?< before the Court of $ppeals %C$& in C$;/!R! SP 77::<?

alleging grae abuse of "iscretion on the RTCAs part!? On 'une 7<, (*7( the C$

grante" the petition! It rule" that the RTC graely abuse" its "iscretion in failing to

ealuate the s.orn state-ents of the .itnesses on .ho- the DO' relie" on! The R

TC base" its fin"ing of lac8 of probable cause pri-arily on the absence of ei"ence

"irectly lin8ing the petitioner HP/ officers to the shooting of the icti- an" theirphysical presence at the cri-e scene!:

In a special ciil action file" before it, ho.eer, the C$ pointe" out that In"iana an"

Ronal" Castillo eecute" affi"aits stating that petitioner HP/ officers 2oine" the S$6

officers in pursuing an" shooting 'un .hile he .as bringing ia to a safer place! The

C$ sai" that, .ith this ei"ence, it is for the petitioner HP/ officers to rebut such

testi-onies at the trial!) The C$ thus or"ere" the issuance of .arrants of arrest

against the petitioner HP/ officers!+On October <, (*7( the C$ "enie" the -otion

for reconsi"eration of its "ecision an" the urgent -otion to >uash .arrants of arrest

an"1or -otion to suspen" the i-ple-entation of the .arrants of arrest,7* hence,

this petition!

The Issues Presente"

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/apr2014/gr_203605_2014.html#fnt1























The case presents the follo.ing issues0

7! =hether or not the C$ erre" in granting the OS/As petition for certiorari

un"er Rule ?<, gien that the RTCAs or"er of "is-issal is a final an"

appealable or"er

(! =hether or not the C$ erre" in counting the prescriptie perio" for filing

a Rule ?< petition fro- the ti-e of receipt of the court or"er by the OS/

rather than by the city prosecutorAs office an"

5! =hether or not the C$ erre" in fin"ing grae abuse of "iscretion on the

part of the RTC 2u"ge in hol"ing that no probable cause eists against

petitioner HP/ officers an" in "is-issing the cri-inal charge against the-!

The CourtAs Rulings

The Court .ill first resole the proce"ural issues!

The R TC 2u"ge .as .ithin his po.ers to "is-iss the case against petitioner HP/

officers!1âwphi1 Section ?, Rule 77( of the Rules of Cri-inal Proce"ure proi"es

that the 2u"ge 9-ay i--e"iately "is-iss the case if the ei"ence on recor" clearly

fails to establish probable cause!9 The C$ shoul" hae "enie" the PeopleAs petition

for special ciil action of certiorari that assails the con;ectness of the or"er of

"is-issal since Section 7 of Rule ?< proi"es that such action is aailable only .hen

9there is no appeal, or any plain, spee"y, an" a"e>uate re-e"y in the or"inary

course of la.!9

The fact, ho.eer, is that Section 7, Rule 7(( of the sa-e rules proi"es that an

appeal -ay be ta8en in a cri-inal action fro- a 2u"g-ent or final or"er li8e the

RTCAs or"er "is-issing the case against petitioner HP/ officers for lac8 of probable

cause! It is a final or"er since it "isposes of the case, ter-inates the procee"ings,

an" leaes the court .ith nothing further to "o .ith respect to the case against

petitioner HP/ officers! The Court ha" -a"e a si-ilar pronounce-ent in Santos !Or"a, 'r!77 Of course, the People -ay refile the case if ne. ei"ence a""uce" in

another preli-inary inestigation .ill support the filing of a ne. infor-ation against

the-! But that is another -atter! 6or no., the C$ clearly erre" in not "enying the

petition for being a .rong re-e"y!

Petitioner HP/ officers point out that, assu-ing the propriety of the filing of a

special ciil action of certiorari against the RTCAs or"er of "is-issal, the People ha"

sity "ays fro- receipt of such or"er .ithin .hich to file the action! Here, the

People file" its petition for certiorari 77( "ays fro- receipt of the "is-issal or"er by

the city prosecutor of Paraa>ue, clearly beyon" the ?*;"ay perio" allo.e" for such

action!

The OS/ conten"s, ho.eer, that the rec8oning point shoul" be fro- the "ate the

Depart-ent of 'ustice or the court gae it notice of the or"er of "is-issal since, as

hel" in Bautista ! Cuneta;Pangilinan,7( the OS/ alone has the authority to

represent the People before the C$! But such a proposition is unfair! There is no

reason for the RTC to sere copy of its 2u"g-ents or final or"ers upon the OS/

since it "oes not enter its appearance in cri-inal cases before it!

In case of per-issible appeals fro- a final or"er in a cri-inal action, the public

prosecutor .ho appears as counsel for the People in such an action an" on .ho- a

copy of the final or"er is thus sere", -ay file a notice of appeal .ithin the

appropriate ti-e since it is a notice a""resse" to the RTC an" not to the C$! Only

the Office of the Solicitor /eneral, ho.eer, -ay pursue the appeal before the C$

by filing the re>uire" appellantAs brief or .ith"ra. the sa-e!

In special ciil actions such as that ta8en by the OS/ before the C$, the public

prosecutorAs "uty, if he beliees that a -atter shoul" be brought by special ciil

action before an appellate court, is to pro-ptly co--unicate the facts an" his

reco--en"ation to the OS/, a"ising it of the last "ay for filing such an action!

There is no reason the OS/ cannot file the petition since the People is gien sity

"ays fro- notice to the public prosecutor .ithin .hich to f ile such an action before

the C$ or this Court!

Since the OS/ file" its petition for certiorari un"er Rule ?< on behalf of the People

77( "ays fro- receipt of the "is-issal or"er by the city prosecutor of Paraa>ue,

the petition .as file" out of ti-e! The or"er of "is-issal is thus beyon" appellate

reie.!

$lthough a purely aca"e-ic eercise in ie. of its aboe rulings, the Court has

ta8en a loo8 into the -erit of the RTCAs or"er of "is-issal since it clashes .ith the

fin"ings of the DO' inestigating prosecutors!

The OS/ relies on the affi"aits of In"iana an" Ronal" V! Castillo %Castillo& in

clai-ing that probable cause eists against petitioner HP/ officers!

In the s.orn state-ent he -a"e before the police on Dece-ber +, (**) In"iana

sai"0 9 ! Tapos narinig 8o ang siga. ABro ang "rier tu-a8as an"yan sa 2eep,

"uon nilapitan ng isang na8a;Vest na -eron pangalan sa li8o" RS$6 at na8abunet at

pinutu8an ang "rier sa ulo! Tapos nagsalita ang nagsabing RS$6 ABro -ay bata

pala!A Einuha ng RS$6 ang bata at "inala sa 8anilang sasa8yan na 8ulay puti ng

sasa8yan! !975

On the other han", .itness Castillo sai" in his s.orn state-ent0 9 ! 3ay

"u-aang sasa8yang papuntang gate ng FPS 'V, -ayroong su-iga. na -ga pulis

AP$TIN NGO, P$TIN NGO!A Biglang hinabol ng "ala.ang pulis ang nasabing

sasa8yan at pinagbabaril! 3ay ilang san"ali ay bu-ali8 ang "ala.ang pulis at sinabi










nila ng AN$P$T$G N$ N$3IN $N/ DRIV#R N/ /$T# $ =$G C$R, $NDOON S$ T$BI

N/'##PA!97@

It is clear fro- In"ianaAs testi-ony that the -an he sa. shoot 'un .as an RS$6

officer, i"entifie" by his assault est an" acco-panie" by another RS$6 officer .ho

also .ore such a est! Castillo "i" not see the act of shooting but confir-e" that

t.o police officers gae chase an" too8 shots at the fleeing ehicle then turne" bac8

to announce to their co-panions that they ha" 8 ille" the "rier of the get;a.ay car!

The HP/ -en belonge" to another unit an" there is no clai- that they .ore another

unitAs est! 3ore telling is the cri-e laboratory report .hich reeale" that none of

the HP/ operaties "ischarge" their firear-s "uring the shootout!7< It "i" not also

help the prosecutionAs case that, per In"ianaAs testi-ony, the S$6 police officers

inole" in the shootout carrie" long firear-s, specifically 37? rifle, 37? baby

ar-alite, an" 37@!7? But the National Police Co--ission issue" t.o certifications

"ate" 'anuary 7@ an" 7+, (*7* to the effect that the petitioner HP/ officers ha" not

been issue" long firear-s fro- (**: up to (*7*!7:

Probable cause for purposes of filing a cri-inal infor-ation is "efine" as such facts

as are sufficient to engen"er a .ell;foun"e" belief that a cri-e has been co--itte"

an" the respon"ent is probably guilty thereof, an" shoul" be hel" for trial!7) The

prosecution ei"ence fails to establish probable cause against petitioner HP/

officers!

=H#R#6OR#, the Court R#V#RS#S the Court of $ppeals Decision "ate" 'une 7<,

(*7( an" Resolution "ate" October <, (*7( in C$/!R! SP 77::<? an" $66IR3S the

Or"er of the Regional Trial Court of Paraa>ue City in Cri-inal Cases 7*;*()* an"

7*;*()7 that "is-isse" the case against petitioners! The Court ORD#RS the

DIS3ISS$ of the charge against the petitioners P1C Insp! a.rence B! Ca2ipe, P1C

Insp! 'oel ! 3en"o4a, P1C Insp! /erar"o B! Balatucan, PO5 'olito P! 3a-anao, 'r!,

PO5 6ernan"o Rey S! /apu4, P*( #"uar"o /! Blanco, PO( #".in Santos, an" PO(

'osil Rey I! ucena! The Court further ORD#RS the .ith"ra.al of the .arrants for

their arrest!

SO ORD#R#D!
















SUPREME COURT

3anila

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 1*321+ $-r&r 26, 2014

CORA#ON MACAPAGAL, Petitioner,

s!


D # C I S I O N

PERALTA, J.:

This is a petition for reie. on certiorari un"er Rule @< of the Rules of Court

assailing the Regional Trial Court7%RTC& Decision "ate" Noe-ber (<, (**)

conicting petitioner Cora4on 3acapagal of the cri-e of #stafa( the Or"er "enying

her 3otion for Reconsi"eration an"1or Ne. Trial5 an" the Or"er@ "ate" 'une (+,

(*7* "enying her Notice of $ppeal,< in Cri-inal Case No! +);7??:((!

6or a proper perspectie, a brief state-ent of the factual an" proce"ural

antece"ents of the case follo.s0

On Noe-ber (<, (**), the RTC ren"ere" a "ecision fin"ing petitioner guilty of the

cri-e of #stafa for -isappropriating, for her o.n benefit, the total a-ount

of P)**,***!**, .hich is the alue of the unreturne" an" unsol" pieces of

2e.elry!? Petitioner receie" the "ecision on

'anuary 75, (**+ then she ti-ely -oe" for reconsi"eration, but .as li8e.ise

"enie" in an Or"er "ate" 3ay (*, (**+ .hich the petitioner allege"ly receie" on

'uly 57, (**+! She suppose"ly file" a Notice of $ppeal: on $ugust 5, (**+, but the

sa-e .as "enie" on 'une (+, (*7* for haing been file" out of ti-e!)

$ggriee", petitioner co-es "irectly before the Court in this petition for reie. on

certiorari .ith the follo.ing assign-ent of errors0

I!

TH# R#/ION$ TRI$ COFRT O6 3$NI$, BR$NCH +, /R$V#G #RR#D IN

D#NGIN/ TH# NOTIC# O6 $PP#$ 6I#D BG TH# H#R#IN P#TITION#R;

$PP#$NT!

II!


CONVICTIN/ TH# H#R#IN P#TITION#R;$PP#$NT O6 TH# CRI3# O6

#ST$6$!

III!


D#NGIN/ TH# 3OTION 6OR R#CONSID#R$TION $ND1OR N#= TRI$ 6I#D

BG TH# H#R#IN P#TITION#R;$PP#$NT!+

=e "eny the petition!

$t the outset, the Court notes that the instant case suffers fro- arious proce"ural

infir-ities .hich this Court cannot ignore an" are fatal to petitioners cause! Itappears that petitioner assails not only the "enial by the RTC of her notice of appeal

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/feb2014/gr_193217_2014.html#fnt1


























but li8e.ise see8s the reersal of her coniction for estafa! 6or reasons that .ill be

"iscusse" belo., the petition is boun" to fail, because of petitioners co-plete

"isregar" of the proce"ural rules an" the or"ers of the Court!

6irst, petitioner aaile" of the .rong -o"e of assailing the trial courts "enial of her

notice of appeal! Sections ( an" 5, Rule 7(( of the Reise" Rules of Cri-inal

Proce"ure lay "o.n the rules on .here, ho. an" .hen appeal is ta8en, to .it0

S#C! (! =here to appeal! The appeal -ay be ta8en as follo.s0

%b& To the Court of $ppeals or to the Supre-e Court in the proper cases proi"e" by

la., in cases "eci"e" by the Regional Trial Court an"

S#C! 5! Ho. appeal ta8en! %a& The appeal to the Regional Trial Court or to the

Court of $ppeals in cases "eci"e" by the Regional Trial Court in the eercise of its

original 2uris"iction, shall be ta8en by filing a notice of appeal file" .ith the court

.hich ren"ere" the 2u"g-ent or final or"er appeale" fro- an" by sering a copy

thereof upon the a"erse party!

S#C! ?! =hen appeal to be ta8en! $n appeal -ust be ta8en .ithin fifteen "ays

fro- pro-ulgation of the 2u"g-ent or fro- notice of the final or"er appeale" fro-

!

Conse>uently, the "isallo.ance of the notice of appeal signifies the "isallo.ance of

the appeal itself!7* $ petition for reie. un"er Rule @< of the Rules of Court is a

-o"e of appeal of a lo.er courts "ecision or final or"er "irect to the Supre-e

Court! Ho.eer, the >uestione" Or"er "enying her notice of appeal is not a "ecision

or final or"er fro- .hich an appeal -ay be ta8en!77 The Rules of Court specifically

proi"es that no appeal shall be ta8en fro- an or"er "isallo.ing or "is-issing an

appeal! Rather, the aggriee" party can eleate the -atter through a special ciil

action un"er Rule ?<! Thus, in aailing of the .rong -o"e of appeal in this petition

un"er Rule @< instea" of the appropriate re-e"y of Rule ?<, the petition -erits an

outright "is-issal!7(

The Court has often a"-onishe" litigants for unnecessarily bur"ening it .ith the

tas8 of "eter-ining un"er .hich rule a petition shoul" fall! It has li8e.ise .arne"

la.yers to follo. the re>uisites for appeal prescribe" by la., eer a.are that any

error or i-precision in co-pliance -ay .ell be fatal to the clients cause!75

Secon", een if .e treat this petition as one for certiorari un"er Rule ?<, it is still

"is-issible for iolation of the hierarchy of courts!7@ $lthough the Supre-e Court

has concurrent 2uris"iction .ith the RTC an" the C$ to issue .rits of certiorari, this

shoul" not be ta8en as granting parties the absolute an" unrestraine" free"o- of

choice of the court to .hich an application .ill be "irecte"!7< Direct resort to this

Court is allo.e" only if there are special, i-portant an" co-pelling reasons clearly

an" specifically spelle" out in the petition, .hich are not present in this case!7?

Thir", een if .e ignore the aboe non;co-pliance an" consi"er the petition as an

appeal of the trial courts "ecision conicting her of estafa, again, .e cannot "o so

for yet another fatal proce"ural shortco-ing co--itte" by petitioner! $s state"

earlier, petitioner eleate" to this Court not only the Or"er "enying her notice of

appeal but also the Decision conicting her of estafa an" the Or"er "enying her

-otion for reconsi"eration! In utter "isregar" of the rules of proce"ure, petitioner

attache" to the petition only the 'une (+, (*7* RTC Or"er "enying her notice of

appeal but she faile" to attach a clearly legible "uplicate original or a certifie" true

copy of the assaile" "ecision conicting her of estafa an" the or"er "enying her

-otion for reconsi"eration!7: $ petition for reie. on certiorari un"er Rule @< of the

Rules of Court -ust contain a certifie" true copy or "uplicate original of the assaile"

"ecision, final or"er or 2u"g-ent!7) 6ailure to co-ply .ith such re>uire-ent shall be

sufficient groun" for the "is-issal of the petition!7+

The -ain reason for the prescribe" attach-ents is to facilitate the reie. an"

ealuation of the petition by -a8ing rea"ily aailable to the Court all the or"ers,

resolutions, "ecisions, plea"ings, transcripts, "ocu-ents, an" pieces of ei"ence

that are -aterial an" releant to the issues presente" in the petition .ithout relying

on the case recor"s of the lo.er court!(*

astly, this petition is boun" to fail because of petitioners repeate" "isregar" of the

Rules an" the Courts la.ful or"ers!1avvphi1 In a Resolution(7 "ate" Septe-ber 7<,

(*7*, the Court re>uire" petitioner to fully co-ply .ith the Rules of Court, the

pertinent portion of .hich rea"s0

(! petitioner to 6FG CO3PG .ith the Rules by sub-itting0 %a& an affi"ait of

serice on the RTC an" on the Office of the Solicitor /eneral %b& a proper

erification in accor"ance .ith Section 7, Rule @< in relation to Section @, Rule : of

the Rules, an" a ali" certification of non;foru- shopping in accor"ance .ith

Section <, Rule :, .ith properly acco-plishe" 2urat sho.ing that the affiant

ehibite" before the notary public at least one current i"entification "ocu-ent

issue" by an official agency bearing the photograph an" signature of the affiant as

re>uire" un"er Sections ? an" 7(, Rule II of the (**@ Rules on Notarial Practice, as

a-en"e" by Court #n Banc Resolution "ate" 7+ 6ebruary (**) in $!3! No! *(;);75;

SC an" %c& her counsels contact "etails pursuant to the #n Banc Resolution "ate"

7* 'uly (**: in $!3! No! *:;?;<;SC, all .ithin fie %<& "ays fro- notice! ((





























Despite the "irectie, no such co-pliance .as -a"e pro-pting the Court to re>uire

her counsel to sho. cause .hy he shoul" not be "isciplinary "ealt .ith for non;

co-pliance! Recor"s li8e.ise sho. that petitioner also faile" to file a Reply to

respon"ents Co--ent to the petition!

On $ugust (, (*77, petitioners counsel sub-itte" his eplanation for non;

co-pliance an" as8e" for -ore ti-e .ithin .hich to co-ply .ith the Courts

resolution, because of heay .or8loa" an" his failure to contact petitioner .ho

apparently transferre" resi"ence! In a Resolution(5 "ate"

$ugust 57, (*77, the Court, .hile granting the -otion for etension re>ueste",

a"-onishe" petitioners counsel for the unsatisfactory eplanation! Get again,

petitioner faile" to file the re>uire" Reply pro-pting the Court again to as8 for the

counsels eplanation .hy he shoul" not be "isciplinary "ealt .ith! Petitioners

counsel clai-e" that he coul" not prepare the re>uire" reply because the

"ocu-ents nee"e" ha" been "estroye" by typhoon 9Pe"ring!9 He, li8e.ise, pointe"

out that he eerte" earnest efforts to locate petitioner but he coul" not "o so at that

point!(@ $fter the Court re>uire" hi- again to sho. cause .hy he shoul" not be

"isciplinary "ealt .ith for not co-plying .ith the Courts resolutions, an" since his

efforts to co--unicate .ith his client proe" futile, he as8e" the Court that he be

reliee" of all his "uties an" responsibilities as counsel on recor"!(< In a

Resolution(? "ate" Dece-ber 7*, (*7(, .e re>uire" petitioner herself to co--ent

thereon, but no such co-pliance .as -a"e to "ate!1âwphi1

In"ee", cases shoul" be "eter-ine" on the -erits after full opportunity to all

parties for entilation of their causes an" "efenses, rather than on technicality or

so-e proce"ural i-perfections in or"er to sere better the en"s of 2ustice!(: It is the

"uty of the counsel to -a8e sure of the nature of the errors he proposes to assign,

to "eter-ine .hich court has appellate 2uris"iction, an" to follo. the re>uisites for

appeal!() $ny error in co-pliance -ay be fatal to the clientAs cause!(+ It shoul" be

stresse" that the right to appeal is neither a natural right nor a part of "ue process!

It is -erely a proce"ural re-e"y of statutory origin an" -ay be eercise" only in

the -anner prescribe" by the proisions of la. authori4ing its eercise!5* The

re>uire-ents of the rules on appeal cannot be consi"ere" as -erely har-less an"triial technicalities that can be "iscar"e" at .hi-! In these ti-es .hen court

"oc8ets are clogge" .ith nu-erous litigations, parties hae to abi"e by these rules

.ith greater fi"elity in or"er to facilitate the or"erly an" epe"itious "isposition of

cases!57

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the petition is D#NI#D for lac8 of -erit!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 1*33 $-r&r 5, 2014

PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Plaintiff;$ppellee,

s!

!AIER MORILLA % AELLANO, $ccuse";$ppellant!

R # S O F T I O N

PERE#, J.:

Before us is an appeal file" by accuse";appellant 'aier 3orilla y $ellano %3orilla&

fro- the Decision7 of the Court of $ppeals .hich affir-e" his coniction an" that of

his co;accuse" Ronnie 3itra y Tena %3ayor 3itra& by the t rial court, sentencing

the-( to suffer the penalty of life i-prison-ent an" to pay a fine of P7*,***,***!**

each!

The Regional Trial Court 'u"g-ent

On 7< October (**7, 3orilla, 3ayor 3itra, =illie Gang y Gao %Gang& an" Ruel

De>uilla y Rego"an %De>uilla& .ere charge" in a cri-inal infor-ation as follo.s0

That on or about October 75, (**7, in Barangay Eiloloran, 3unicipality of Real,Proince of Jue4on, Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court,

the aboe;na-e" accuse", one of the- an incu-bent -ayor of the 3unicipality of

Panu8ulan, Jue4on Proince, .ho all belong to an organi4e"1syn"icate cri-e group

as they all help one another, for purposes of gain in the transport of illegal "rugs,

an" in fact, conspiring an" confe"erating together an" -utually ai"ing an" abetting

one another, "i" then an" there .ilfully, unla.fully, an" feloniously transport by

-eans of t.o %(& -otor ehicles, na-ely a Stare an bearing plate nu-ber R=T;

))) .ith co--e-oratie plate to rea" 93ayor9 an" a -unicipal a-bulance of

Panu8ulan, Jue4on Proince, -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e, a regulate" "rug

.hich is co--only 8no.n as shabu, an" .ith an approi-ate .eight of fie

hun"re" three point sity eight %<*5!?)& 8ilos, .ithout authority .hatsoeer!5
































$fter trial, the Regional Trial Court of Jue4on City@ on 7 $ugust (**: conicte"

3orilla an" his co;accuse" 3ayor 3itra, then incu-bent 3ayor of Panu8ulan,

Jue4on, of illegal transport< of -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e, co--only 8no.n

as shabu, .ith an approi-ate .eight of fie hun"re" three point sity eight

%<*5!?)& 8ilos! Ho.eer, it absole" De>uilla an" Gang "ue to the prosecutions

failure to present sufficient ei"ence to conict the- of the offense charge"! The

"ispositie of the "ecision rea"s0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", 2u"g-ent is hereby ren"ere" fin"ing accuse"

Ronnie 3itra y Tena an" 'aier 3orilla y $ellana /FITG beyon" reasonable "oubt

of the offense charge"! $ccor"ingly, both accuse" are hereby sentence" to suffer

the penalty of life i-prison-ent an" to pay a fine of P7*,***,***!** each! $ccuse"

=illie Gang y Gao an" Ruel De>uilla y Rego"an are hereby $CJFITT#D for failure of

the prosecution to proe their guilt beyon" reasonable "oubt an" are or"ere"

i--e"iately release" fro- custo"y unless hel" for so-e other la.ful cause!

The -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e or"ere" retaine" by the Court as

representatie sa-ple .hich is still in the custo"y of the PNP Cri-e aboratory is

or"ere" turne" oer to the Philippine Drug #nforce-ent $gency for proper

"isposition!?

The trial court foun" ali" the search con"ucte" by police officers on the ehicles

"rien by 3ayor 3itra an" 3orilla, one .ith control nu-ber ))) an" the other an

a-bulance .ith plate nu-ber S6E;5:(, as the police officers hae alrea"y ac>uire"

prior 8no.le"ge that the sai" ehicles .ere suspecte" to be use" for transportation

of "angerous "rugs! During the chec8point in Real, Jue4on, the infor-ation turne"

out to be accurate an" in"ee", the t.o accuse" ha" in their -otor ehicles -ore

than fie hun"re" 8ilos of -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e!:

The trial court "is-isse" the argu-ents of 3ayor 3itra that he .as .ithout any

8no.le"ge of the contents of the sac8s an" that he .as -erely re>ueste" to

transport the- to 3anila on boar" his Stare an! He eplaine" that he only

acco--o"ate" the re>uest of a certain Ben Tan because the latter bought his

fishing boat! It li8e.ise "is-isse" the "efense of a-bulance "rier 3orilla of lac8 of

8no.le"ge of the illegality of the contents! 3orilla insiste" that he thought that he

.as 2ust transporting .oo"en tiles an" electronic spare parts together .ith De>uilla!

The other passenger of the a-bulance, Gang, in his "efense, "i" not bother to

in>uire about the contents of the ehicle as he .as -erely an acco--o"ate"

passenger of the a-bulance!

The court re2ecte" the "efenses presente" by 3orilla an" 3ayor 3itra as they .ere

caught in flagrante "elicto of transporting "angerous "rugs in t.o ehicles "rien by

each of the-! $bsent any conincing circu-stance to corroborate their

eplanations, the ali"ity of their apprehension .as sustaine"!)

The ruling of conspiracy bet.een 3ayor 3itra an" 3orilla .as base" on the

testi-onies of the four accuse" the-seles! It .as foun" by the trial court that the

t.o ehicles, the Stare an "rien by 3ayor 3itra an" the a-bulance an "rien

by 3orilla, left Infanta, Jue4on en route to 3anila! The Stare an .hich .as ahea"

of the a-bulance .as able to pass the chec8point set up by the police officers!

Ho.eer, the a-bulance "rien by 3orilla .as stoppe" by police officers! Through

the untinte" .in"o., one of the police officers notice" seeral sac8s insi"e the an!

Fpon in>uiry of the contents, 3orilla replie" that the sac8s containe" narra .oo"en

tiles!

Fnconince", the police officers re>ueste" 3orilla to open the rear "oor of the car

for further inspection! =hen it .as opene", the operaties notice" that .hite

crystalline granules .ere scattere" on the floor, pro-pting the- to re>uest 3orilla

to open the sac8s! $t this -o-ent, 3orilla tol" the police officers that he .as .ith

3ayor 3itra in an atte-pt to persua"e the- to let hi- pass!+ His re>uest .as

re2ecte" by the police officers an" upon inspection, the contents of the sac8s turne"

out to be sac8s of -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e!7* This "iscoery pro-pte" the

operaties to chase the Stare an of 3ayor 3itra! The police officers .ere able to

oerta8e the an an" 3ayor 3itra .as as8e" to stop! They then in>uire" if the

-ayor 8ne. 3orilla! On plain ie., the operaties notice" that his an .as also

loa"e" .ith sac8s li8e the ones foun" in the a-bulance! Thus, 3ayor 3itra .as also

re>ueste" to open the "oor of the ehicle for inspection! $t this instance, 3ayor3itra offere" to settle the -atter but the sa-e .as re2ecte"! Fpon ea-ination, the

contents of the sac8s .ere li8e.ise foun" to contain sac8s of -etha-pheta-ine

hy"rochlori"e!77

The t.o other accuse" in this case, De>uilla an" Gang, .ere ac>uitte" by the trial

court for failure on the part of the prosecution to establish their guilt beyon"

reasonable "oubt! The court rule" that De>uillas an" Gangs -ere presence insi"e

the ehicle as passengers .as ina"e>uate to proe that they .ere also conspirators

of 3ayor 3itra an" 3orilla!7(

The Court of $ppeals Decision

On 75 'uly (**+, the appellate court affir-e" the ruling of the trial court! It uphel"

the fin"ing of conspiracy bet.een 3ayor 3itra an" 3orilla in their co--on intent to

transport seeral sac8s containing -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e on boar" their

respectie ehicles! The singularity of their intent to illegally transport

-etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e .as rea"ily sho.n .hen 3orilla agree" to "rie

the a-bulance an fro- Infanta, Jue4on to 3anila together .ith 3ayor 3itra, .ho

"roe the lea" ehicle, the Stare an!75

The appellate court li8e.ise "is-isse" the argu-ent of lac8 of 8no.le"ge of the

illegal contents of the sac8s! The clai- that the sac8s .ere loa"e" .ith .oo"en tiles

.as i-plausible "ue to the obious "isparity of teture an" olu-e!7@





























Courts Ruling

=e affir- the ruling but -o"ify the penalty i-pose"!

In his supple-ental brief, 3orilla raise" the issues0 %7& .hether he -ay be

conicte" for conspiracy to co--it the offense charge" sans allegation of

conspiracy in the Infor-ation, an" %(& .hether the prosecution .as able to proe

his culpability as allege" in the Infor-ation!7<

=e "is-iss his argu-ents!

3orilla pri-arily cites the proision on Sec! 7%b&, Rule 77< of the Rules on Cri-inal

Proce"ure7? to substantiate his argu-ent that he shoul" hae been infor-e" first of

the nature an" cause of the accusation against hi-! He pointe" out that the

Infor-ation itself faile" to state the .or" conspiracy but instea", the state-ent 9the

aboe;na-e" accuse", one of the- an incu-bent -ayor of the 3unicipality of

Panu8ulan, Jue4on Proince, .ho all belong to an organi4e"1syn"icate" cri-e group

as they all help one another, "i" then an" there .ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously

transport !9 He argue" that conspiracy .as only inferre" fro- the .or"s use"

in the Infor-ation!7:

#en assu-ing that his assertion is correct, the issue of "efect in the infor-ation, at

this point, is "ee-e" to hae been .aie" "ue to 3orillas failure to assert it as a

groun" in a -otion to >uash before entering his plea! 7)

6urther, it -ust be note" that accuse" 3orilla participate" an" presente" his

"efenses to contra"ict the allegation of conspiracy before the trial an" appellate

courts! His failure or neglect to assert a right .ithin a reasonable ti-e .arrants a

presu-ption that the party entitle" to assert it either has aban"one" it or "ecline"

to assert it!7+

The fin"ing of conspiracy by both courts is correct!

$ conspiracy eists .hen t.o or -ore persons co-e to an agree-ent concerning

the co--ission of a felony an" "eci"e to co--it it!(* To "eter-ine conspiracy, there

-ust be a co--on "esign to co--it a fe lony!(7

3orilla argues that the -ere act of "riing the a-bulance on the "ate he .as

apprehen"e" is not sufficient to proe that he .as part of a syn"icate" group

inole" in the illegal transportation of "angerous "rugs!

This argu-ent is -isplace"!

In conspiracy, it nee" not be sho.n that the parties actually ca-e together an"agree" in epress ter-s to enter into an" pursue a co--on "esign! The assent of

the -in"s -ay be an", fro- the secrecy of the cri-e, usually inferre" fro- proof of

facts an" circu-stances .hich, ta8en together, in"icate that they are parts of so-e

co-plete .hole!((In this case, the totality of the factual circu-stances lea"s to a

conclusion that 3orilla conspire" .ith 3ayor 3itra in a co--on "esire to transport

the "angerous "rugs! Both ehicles loa"e" .ith seeral sac8s of "angerous "rugs,

.ere on conoy fro- Jue4on to 3anila! 3ayor 3itra .as able to "rie through the

chec8point set up by the police operaties! =hen it .as 3orillas turn to pass

through the chec8point, he .as re>ueste" to open the rear "oor for a routinary

chec8! Noticing .hite granules scattere" on the floor, the police officers re>ueste"

3orilla to open the sac8s! If in"ee" he .as not inole" in conspiracy .ith 3ayor3itra, he .oul" not hae tol" the police officers that he .as .ith the -ayor!

His insistence that he .as .ithout any 8no.le"ge of the contents of the sac8s an"

he 2ust obeye" the instruction of his i--e"iate superior 3ayor 3itra in "riing the

sai" ehicle li8e.ise bears no -erit!

Here, 3orilla an" 3ayor 3itra .ere caught in flagrante "elicto in the act of

transporting the "angerous "rugs on boar" their ehicles! 9Transport9 as use" un"er

the Dangerous Drugs $ct -eans 9to carry or coney fro- one place to another!9(5 It

.as .ell establishe" "uring trial that 3orilla .as "riing the a-bulance follo.ing

the lea" of 3ayor 3itra, .ho .as "riing a Stare an going to 3anila! The ery act

of transporting -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e is -alu- prohibitu- since it is

punishe" as an offense un"er a special la.! The fact of transportation of the sac8s

containing "angerous "rugs nee" not be acco-panie" by proof of cri-inal intent,

-otie or 8no.le"ge!(@

In a si-ilar case of People ! ibnao,(< this Court uphel" the coniction for illegal

transportation of -ari2uana of ibnao an" Nunga, .ho .ere caught carrying a bag

full of -ari2uana leaes .hen they .ere f lagge" "o.n on boar" a passing tricycle at

a chec8point!

Ho.eer, .e -o"ify the penalty i-pose" by the trial court as affir-e" by the Court

of $ppeals!

Originally, un"er Section 7< of Republic $ct No! ?@(<,(? the penalty for illegal

transportation of -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e .as i-prison-ent ranging fro-

si years an" one "ay to t.ele years an" a fine ranging fro- si thousan" to

t.ele thousan" pesos! Pursuant to Presi"ential Decree No! 7?)5,(: the penalty .as

a-en"e" to life i-prison-ent to "eath an" a fine ranging fro- t.enty to thirty

thousan" pesos! The penalty .as further a-en"e" in Republic $ct No!

:?<+,() .here the penalty .as change" to reclusion perpetua to "eath an" a fine

ranging fro- fie hun"re" thousan" pesos to ten -illion pesos!

6ro- the foregoing, .e sustain the i-pose" penalty of fine of P7*,***,**!** to be

pai" by each of the accuse" but a-en" the penalty to reclusion perpetua follo.ing

the proisions of Republic $ct No! :?<+ an" the principle of retroactie application


































of lighter penalty! Reclusion perpetua entails i-prison-ent for at least thirty %5*&

years after .hich the conict beco-es eligible for par"on! It also carries .ith it

accessory penalties, na-ely0 perpetual special "is>ualification, etc! ife

i-prison-ent, on the other han", "oes not appear to hae any "efinite etent or

"uration an" carries no accessory penalties!(+

The full particulars are in Ho =ai Pang ! People,5* thus0

$s to the penalties i-pose" by the trial court an" as affir-e" by the appellatecourt, .e fin" the sa-e in accor" .ith la. an" 2urispru"ence! It shoul" be recalle"

that at the ti-e of the co--ission of the cri-e on Septe-ber ?, 7++7, Section 7<

of R!$! No! ?@(< .as alrea"y a-en"e" by Presi"ential Decree No! 7?)5! The "ecree

proi"e" that for iolation of sai" Section 7<, the penalty of life i-prison-ent to

"eath an" a fine ranging fro- P(*,***!** toP5*,***!** shall be i-pose"!

Subse>uently, ho.eer, R!$! No! :?<+ further intro"uce" ne. a-en"-ents to

Section 7<, $rticle III an" Section (*, $rticle IV of R!$! No! ?@(<, as a-en"e"!

Fn"er the ne. a-en"-ents, the penalty prescribe" in Section 7< .as change"

fro- 9life i-prison-ent to "eath an" a fine ranging fro- P(*,***!**

to P5*,***!**9 to 9reclusion perpetua to "eath an" a fine ranging fro- P<**,***!**

to P7* -illion!9 On the other han", Section 7: of R!$! No! :?<+ a-en"e" Section

(*, $rticle IV of R!$! No! ?@(< in that the ne. penalty proi"e" by the a-en"atory

la. shall be applie" "epen"ing on the >uantity of the "angerous "rugs inole"!

The trial court, in this case, i-pose" on petitioner the penalty of reclusion perpetua

un"er R!$! No! :?<+ rather than life i-prison-ent ratiocinating that R!$! No! :?<+

coul" be gien retroactie application, it being -ore faorable to the petitioner in

ie. of its haing a less stricter punish-ent!1âwphi1

=e agree! In People ! Doro2a, .e hel"0

9In People ! 3artin Si-on %/!R! No! +5*(), (+ 'uly 7++@& this Court rule" %a& that

the a-en"atory la., being -ore lenient an" faorable to the accuse" than the

original proisions of the Dangerous Drugs $ct, shoul" be accor"e" retroactie

application, !9

$n", since 9reclusion perpetua is a lighter penalty than life i-prison-ent, an"

consi"ering the rule that cri-inal statutes .ith a faorable effect to the accuse",

hae, as to hi-, a retroactie effect,9 the penalty i-pose" by the trial court upon

petitioner is proper! Conse>uently, the Court sustains the penalty of i-prison-ent,

.hich is reclusion perpetua, as .ell as the a-ount of fine i-pose" by the trial court

upon petitioner, the sa-e being -ore faorable to hi-! 57

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the petition is D#NI#D an" the assaile" 75 'uly

(**+ Decision of the Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR;H!C! *(+?: is $66IR3#D =ITH

3ODI6IC$TION .ith respect to the penalty to be i-pose" as Reclusion Perpetua

instea" of ife I-prison-ent an" pay-ent of fine of P7*,***,***!** by each of the

accuse"!

SO ORD#R#D!

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

3anila

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 2015 !' 4, 2014

PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Plaintiff;$ppellee,s!!ENN% LIIRAN &li& Lolo, $ccuse";$ppellant!

R # S O F T I O N









RE%ES, J.:

'enny i8iran %accuse";appellant& .as conicte" of the cri-e of 3ur"er by theRegional Trial Court %RTC& of 3alaybalay City, Branch ), for the "eath of Rolan"oSareno, Sr! %Sareno &! In its Decision7 "ate" 'uly 7:, (**?, the RTC "ispose" asfollo.s0

=H#R#6OR#, this court fin"s accuse" oloy i8iran guilty of the cri-e of 3ur"er an"i-poses upon hi- the penalty of Reclusion perpetua an" to pay the heirs of the

icti- the su- of KPL<*,***!** as ciil in"e-nity KPL<*,***!** -oral "a-agesKPL5*,***!** actual "a-ages, an" KPL7*,***!** attorneyAs fee an" to pay thecosts! This court has no 2uris"iction oer 'ero-e alias Caro i8iran as he is noti-plea"e" in the infor-ation!

SO ORD#R#D!(

The inci"ent that le" to the "eath of Sareno happene" on the .ee hour of 3arch 7+,(*** in BarangayBugca;on, antapon, Bu8i"non! It .as the ee of the to.n fiestaan" a "ance .as being hel" at the bas8etball court! Prosecution .itnesses CelsoDagangon %Dagangon&, Presca"o 3erca"o %3erca"o& an" Constancio /oloceno%/oloceno& testifie" that on sai" night, they .ere at the "ance together .ith Sarenoat aroun" )0** p!-! $fter a fe. hours, .hile 3erca"o an" /oloceno .ere insi"e the"ance area, 'ero-e i8iran5 %'ero-e&, the accuse";appellants brother, punche"

3erca"o on the -outh! /oloceno .as about to assist 3erca"o .hen he sa. that'ero-e .as ar-e" .ith a short firear- .hile the accuse";appellant .as hol"ing ahunting 8nife, so he bac8e" off! Dagangon an" Sareno, .ho .ere outsi"e the "ancearea, hear" the co--otion! $fter.ar"s, 'ero-e approache" Sareno an" shot hi-seeral ti-es! =ith Sareno fallen, the accuse";appellant stabbe" hi- on the bac8!It .as Dagangon .ho sa. the inci"ent first;han" as he .as only three -eters fro-.here Sareno .as! Dagangon .as able to bring Sareno to the hospital only after'ero-e an" the accuse";appellant left, but Sareno .as alrea"y "ea" at that point!Sareno suffere" -ultiple gunshot .oun"s an" a stab .oun" at the left scapulararea!@

The accuse";appellant, ho.eer, "enie" any inole-ent in the cri-e! =hile hea"-itte" that he .as at the "ance, he "i" not go outsi"e .hen the co--otionhappene"! Hean" 'ero-e staye" .ithin the area .here the soun" -achine .aslocate" an" they only hear" the gunshots outsi"e! Other . itnesses testifie" in theaccuse";appellants "efense, .ith #"gar In"anon testifying that he sa. the stabbinginci"ent an" that it .as so-e other un8no.n person, an" not the accuse";appellant, .ho .as the culprit an" #leuterio Juiopa stating that he .as .ith theaccuse";appellant an" 'ero-e insi"e the "ance hall at the ti-e the co--otionoccurre"!

The RTC foun" that the prosecution .as able to establish the accuse";appellantsculpability!< Prosecution .itness Dagangons positie i"entification of the accuse";appellant .as hel" sufficient by the RTC to conict the latter of the cri-e of-ur"er!? The RTC also re2ecte" the accuse";appellants "efense of "enial as it .asnot supporte" by ei"ence! It also rule" that alibi cannot faor the accuse";appellant since he faile" to proe that it .as i-possible for hi- to be at the scene

of the cri-e on the night of 3arch 7+, (***!

:

The Court of $ppeals %C$& affir-e" the RTC "ecision in toto per assaile"Decision) "ate" 'uly (:, (*77, to .it0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the appeale" Decision "ate" 'uly 7:, (**? ofthe Regional Trial Court, Branch ) of 3alaybalay City, in Cri-inal Case No! 7*@5+;**is hereby $66IR3#D in toto!

SO ORD#R#D!+

The C$ sustaine" the fin"ings of the RTC as regar"s the i"entity of the accuse";appellant as one of the perpetrators of the cri-e! The C$, neertheless, "eiate"fro- the RTCs conclusion that there .as conspiracy bet.een 'ero-e an" theaccuse";appellant, an" that abuse of superior strength atten"e" the co--ission ofthe cri-e! $ccor"ing to the C$, the infor-ation faile" to contain the allegation ofconspiracy, an" the ei"ence for the prosecution faile" to establish that 'ero-e an"the accuse";appellant gange" up on the icti-!7*

The C$, ho.eer, sustaine" the RTCs fin"ing of treachery!77

The accuse";appellant proteste" his coniction!7( $ccor"ing to hi-, the prosecutionfaile" to establish his guilt beyon" reasonable "oubt! Specifically, the accuse";appellant argue" that the prosecution faile" to proe the i"entity of the assailant

an" his culpability!75

Fpon reie., the Court fin"s no cogent reason to "isturb the fin"ings an"conclusions of the RTC, as affir-e" by the C$, inclu"ing their assess-ent of thecre"ibility of the .itnesses! 6actual fin"ings of the trial court are, ecept forco-pelling or eceptional reasons, conclusie to the Court especially .hen fullysupporte" by ei"ence an" affir-e" by the C$!7@

The first "uty of the prosecution is not to proe the cri-e but to proe the i"entityof the cri-inal!7<In this case, the i"entity of the accuse";appellant as one of theperpetrators of the cri-e has been a"e>uately establishe" by the prosecution, -oreparticularly by the testi-ony of Dagangon! The Court cannot sustain the accuse";appellants argu-ent that it .as i-possible for Dagangon to see the assailantconsi"ering that there .as no ei"ence to sho. that the place .here the cri-eoccurre" .as lighte"! $s foun" by the C$, Dagangon .as only three -eters a.ayfro- the accuse";appellant an" 'ero-e an" ha" a goo" ie. of the-! 3oreoer,there .as no "istraction that coul" hae "isrupte" Dagangons attention! He eeni--e"iately i"entifie" the accuse";appellant an" 'ero-e "uring police inestigation,an" there is no sho.ing that Dagangon .as infor-e" by the police beforehan" thatthe accuse";appellant .as one of the suspects!7? Positie i"entification by aprosecution .itness of the accuse" as one of the perpetrators of the cri-e isentitle" to greater .eight than alibi an" "enial!7: Such positie i"entification gainsfurther groun" in the absence of any ill -otie on the part of a .itness to falselytestify against an accuse"!7)

The accuse";appellant also asserte" that the infor-ation charge" hi- of -ur"erco--itte" by attac8ing, assaulting, stabbing an" shooting Sareno, thereby causinghis instantaneous "eath!7+ The accuse";appellant argue" that the ei"ence onrecor" establishe" that Sareno .as in fact shot by so-e other person!(* $t this

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_201858_2014.html#fnt1















































2uncture, the Court notes that the testi-ony of Dagangon, in"ee", i"entifie" t.oassailants the accuse";appellant an" his brother, 'ero-e ho.eer, it .as only theaccuse";appellant .ho .as charge" .ith the "eath of Sareno! Defense .itnessesalso testifie" that 'ero-e "ie" on 3arch 7(, (**<! (7

The C$ "isregar"e" the accuse";appellants contention an" rule" that 9the cause of"eath .as not -a"e an issue in the court a >uo9 an" the Certificate of Death .asa"-itte" "uring the pre;trial conference as proof of the fact an" cause of"eath!(( $n" een assu-ing that the cause of "eath .as an issue, the C$ still hel"the accuse";appellant liable for the "eath of Sareno on the basis of the Courts

ruling in People ! Pilola!(5

The Court reie.e" the recor"s of this case an" fin"s sufficient basis for the C$s"isregar" of the accuse";appellants argu-ent!

The pre;trial agree-ent issue" by the RTC states that one of the -atters stipulate"upon an" a"-itte" by the prosecution an" the "efense .as that the Certificate ofDeath issue" by Dr! Ci"ric Dael %Dr! Dael& of the Bu8i"non Proincial Hospital an"reie.e" by the Rural Health Physician of 3alaybalay City 9is a"-itte" as proof offact an" cause of "eath "ue to -ultiple stab .oun" scapular area!9(@ Stipulation offacts "uring pre;trial is allo.e" by Rule 77) of the Reise" Rules of Cri-inalProce"ure! Section ( of Rule 77), -ean.hile, prescribes that all agree-ents ora"-issions -a"e or entere" "uring the pre;trial conference shall be re"uce" in

.riting an" signe" by the accuse" an" counsel, other.ise, they cannot be use"against the accuse"!(< In this case, .hile it appears that the pre;trial agree-ent.as signe" only by the prosecution an" "efense counsel, the sa-e -ayneertheless be a"-itte" gien that the "efense faile" to ob2ect to itsa"-ission!(? 3oreoer, a "eath certificate issue" by a -unicipal health officer in theregular perfor-ance of his "uty is pri-a facie ei"ence of the cause of "eath of theicti-!(: Note that the certificate of "eath issue" by Dr! Dael proi"es the follo.ing0

C$FS#S O6 D#$TH

I--e"iate cause 0 DO$

$ntece"ent cause 0 3ultiple /S=

Fn"erlying cause 0 Stab .oun" scapular area %&()

The accuse";appellant, therefore, is boun" by his a"-ission of Sarenos cause of"eath!(+

3ore i-portantly, the accuse";appellant is cri-inally liable for the natural an"logical conse>uence resulting fro- his act of stabbing Sareno! It -ay be that he.as not the shooter, it is neertheless true that the stab .oun" he inflicte" onSareno contribute" to the latters "eath! In Juinto ! $n"res,5* the Court state"that0

If a person inflicts a .oun" .ith a "ea"ly .eapon in such a -anner as to put life in

2eopar"y an" "eath follo.s as a conse>uence of their felonious act, it "oes not alterits nature or "i-inish its cri-inality to proe that other causes cooperate" in

pro"ucing the factual result! The offen"er is cri-inally liable for the "eath of theicti- if his "elictual act cause", accelerate" or contribute" to the "eath of theicti-! $ "ifferent "octrine .oul" ten" to gie i--unity to cri-e an" to ta8e a.ayfro- hu-an life a salutary an" essential safeguar"! K!L57 %Citations o-itte" an"e-phasis ours&

The Court, ho.eer, cannot agree .ith the RTC an" C$s conclusion that the 8illingof Sareno .as atten"e" by treachery, >ualifying the cri-e to -ur"er!

Treachery is appreciate" as a >ualifying circu-stance .hen the follo.ing ele-entsare sho.n0 a& the -alefactor e-ploye" -eans, -etho", or -anner of eecutionaffor"ing the person attac8e" no opportunity for self;"efense or retaliation an" b&the -eans, -etho", or -anner of eecution .as "eliberately or consciously a"opte"by the offen"er!5( Treachery is not present .hen the 8illing is not pre-e"itate", or.here the su""en attac8 is not preconceie" an" "eliberately a"opte", but is 2usttriggere" by a su""en infuriation on the part of the accuse" as a result of aproocatie act of the icti-, or .hen the 8illing is "one at the spur of the-o-ent!55

In this case, the testi-ony of the prosecution .itnesses all point to the fact that theshooting an" stabbing of Sareno .as actually a spur of the -o-ent inci"ent, aresult of the bra.l that happene" "uring the barrio "ance! The prosecution faile" tosho. that the accuse";appellant an" his brother 'ero-e "eliberately planne" the

-eans by .hich they .oul" har- Sareno! In fact, .hat .as reeale" by theprosecution ei"ence .as that Sareno .as an innocent bystan"er .ho unfortunatelybeca-e a target of the accuse";appellant an" 'ero-es ra-page! Conse>uently, theaccuse";appellant shoul" be liable only for the lesser cri-e of Ho-ici"e!

In conictions for ho-ici"e, $rticle (@+ of the Reise" Penal Co"e %RPC& prescribesthe penalty of reclusion te-poral, .hich ranges fro- t.ele %7(& years an" one %7&"ay to t.enty %(*& years!5@ In the absence of any -o"ifying circu-stances, thepenalty shoul" be i-pose" in its -e"iu- perio",5< or fro- fourteen %7@& years,eight %)& -onths an" one %7& "ay to seenteen %7:& years an" four %@& -onths!$pplying the In"eter-inate Sentence a.,5? the -ai-u- of the penalty to bei-pose" on the accuse";appellant shall be .ithin the range of reclusion te-poral-e"iu-,5: an" the -ini-u- shall be .ithin the range of the penalty net lo.er tothat prescribe" by the RPC for the offense,5) or prision -ayor in any of its perio"s,

.hich ranges fro- si %?& years an" one %7& "ay to t.ele %7(& years!5+ There beingno -itigating or aggraating circu-stance, the Court thereby sentences theaccuse";appellant to suffer an in"eter-inate penalty of ten %7*& years of prision-ayor -e"iu-, as -ini-u-, to fourteen %7@& years, eight %)& -onths an" one %7&"ay of reclusion te-poral -e"iu-, as -ai-u-!

=ith regar" to the "a-ages a.ar"e", the Court affir-s the a.ar" of 6ifty Thousan"Pesos %P<*,***!**& ciil in"e-nity an" 6ifty Thousan" Pesos %P<*,***!**& -oral"a-ages, as these are in accor" .ith the CourtAs 2u"icial policy on the-atter!@* These, on top of the Thirty Thousan" Pesos %P5*,***!**& actual "a-agesan" Ten Thousan" Pesos %P7*,***!**& attorneyAs fees a.ar"e" by the RTC an"affir-e" by the C$! 6urther, the -onetary a.ar"s shall earn interest at the rate ofsi percent % ?M& per annu- fro- the "ate of the finality of this 2u"g-ent until fullypai"!@7





















































The Court, -oreoer, "eletes the attorneyAs fees a.ar"e" by the RTC as there isnothing on recor" proing that the heirs of Sareno actually incurre" such epense!$ttorneyAs fees are in the concept of actual or co-pensatory "a-ages allo.e"un"er the circu-stances proi"e" for in $rticle ((*) of the Ciil Co"e,@( an" absentany ei"ence supporting its grant, the sa-e -ust be "elete" for lac8 of factualbasis!1âwphi1

=H#R#6OR#, the Decision "ate" 'uly (:, (*77 of the Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R!CR;HC No! **@)@ is 3ODI6I#D in that accuse";appellant 'enny i8iran alias 9oloy9is hereby foun" guilty of the lesser cri-e of HO3ICID#, an" is sentence" to suffer

the in"eter-inate penalty often %7*& years of prision -ayor -e"iu-, as -ini-u-,to fourteen %7@& years, eight %)& -onths an" one %7& "ay of reclusion te-poral-e"iu-, as -ai-u-! 6urther, the a.ar" of attorneyAs fees is hereby D##T#D!

Interest at the rate of si percent % ?M& per annu- shall be i-pose" on all the"a-ages a.ar"e", to earn fro- the "ate of the finality of this 2u"g-ent until fullypai"!

In all other respects, the Court of $ppeals "ecision is $66IR3#D!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 1**6* M&r 12, 2014


s!





)ERMANOS CONSTANTINO, !R. INA%UG, &.7.&. !O!IT, $ccuse";

$ppellant!

D # C I S I O N

LEONAR"O8"E CASTRO, J.:

This appeal challenges the Decision7 "ate" 'uly (+, (*77 of the Court of $ppeals in

C$;/!R! CR!;H!C! No! *55<5, affir-ing the Decision(

"ate" $pril 7<, (**) of theRegional Trial Court %R TC&, Branch < of Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, in Cri-inal Case

No! 7*<7?, .hich foun" accuse";appellant Her-anos Constantino, 'r! y Binayug,

a!8!a! 9'o2it9 %Constantino&, guilty of the cri-e of illegal sale of -etha-pheta-ine

hy"rochlori"e, -ore popularly 8no.n as shabu, un"er $rticle II, Section < of

Republic $ct No! +7?<, other.ise 8no.n as the Co-prehensie Dangerous Drugs

$ct of (**(!

The Infor-ation5 file" before the R TC charge" Constantino, as follo.s0

That on 'anuary (*, (**<, in the City of Tuguegarao, Proince of Cagayan an"

.ithin the 2uris"iction of the Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e" accuse", .ithout

authority of la. an" .ithout per-it to sell, transport, "elier an" "istribute"angerous "rugs, "i" then an" there .illfully, unla.fully an" feloniously sell,

transport, "istribute an" "elier t.o %(& heat;seale" transparent plastic sachets

containing *!7@ gra- of 3etha-pheta-ine Hy"rochlori"e co--only 8no.n as

9shabu9, a "angerous "rug to a -e-ber of the PNP, Tuguegarao City .ho acte" as a

poseur;buyer that after receiing the t.o %(& plastic sachets, the poseur;buyer

si-ultaneously han"e" to the accuse" the -ar8e" -oney consisting of one %7&

piece of 6IV# HFNDR#D P#SO BI %P<**!**& .ith Serial No! JP(:)*:* an" fie %<&

pieces of ON# HFNDR#D P#SO BI .ith Serial Nos! S3+)+*<5, PS:(@@(+,

3@)@<)@, BB*@)**(, an" #E?+***(< or a total of P7,***!** an" this le" to the

apprehension of the accuse" an" the confiscation of the "angerous "rug together

.ith the buy;bust -oney by the sai" apprehen"ing la. enforcers of the Tuguegarao

City Police Station .ho for-e" the buy bust tea- in coor"ination .ith the PD#$!

=hen arraigne" on 'uly ), (**<, Constantino plea"e" not guilty to the cri-e

charge"!@ Thereafter, pre;trial an" trial on the -erits ensue"!

#i"ence for the prosecution presente" the follo.ing ersion of eents0

On 'anuary (*, (**<, at aroun" (0** in the afternoon, Police Superinten"ent

%P1Supt!& 3ariano Ro"rigue4 %Ro"ri>ue4&, the Chief of Police of Tuguegarao City,

receie" a report fro- a confi"ential infor-ant %CI& that a certain 'o2it .as selling

illegal "rugs in the sai" city! P1Supt!

Ro"rigue4 i--e"iately for-e" a buy;bust group co-pose" of Senior Police Officer%SPO& ( Noel Taguia- %Taguia-&, SPO( $lean"er Ta-ang %Ta-ang&, SPO7 $rthur

Bla>uera %Bla>uera&, Police Officer %PO& 5 #".in Hernan"e4 %Hernan"e4&, an" PO5

Rolan"o Do-ingo %Do-ingo&! PO5 Do-ingo .as "esignate" as the poseur;buyer!

The buy;bust -oney, consisting of one P<**!** bill an" fie P7**!** bills, .ere

"uste" .ith fluorescent po."er an" their respectie serial nu-bers .ere recor"e"

in the police blotter!<

$roun" )0** in the eening of the sa-e "ay, the tea- procee"e" to Reynoilla St!,

Caritan Centro, Tuguegarao City, the place .here, accor"ing to the CI, 'o2it .as

selling shabu! PO5 Do-ingo positione" hi-self besi"e a street light .hile the rest of

the tea- hi" behin" a nearby concrete fence! $fter .aiting for about @< -inutes,

Constantino arrie" on boar" a tricycle! PO5 Do-ingo recogni4e" Constantino as the

'o2it "escribe" by the CI! PO5 Do-ingo approache" Constantino an" as8e" hi- if he

.as 'o2it! =hen Constantino replie" in the affir-atie, PO5 Do-ingo net as8e",

93ayroon 8a bang stuff9 %9Do you hae stuff9& In response, Constantino in>uire"

of PO5 Do-ingo ho. -uch he .ante" to buy! PO5 Do-ingo sai" he .ante" to

buy P7,***!** .orth of shabu, si-ultaneously han"ing oer the buy;bust -oney to

Constantino, .ho, in turn, han"e" t.o plastic sachets to PO5 Do-ingo! Thereupon,

PO5 Do-ingo turne" his cap bac8.ar"s, the pre;arrange" signal for the

consu--ate" sale! Fpon seeing the signal, the other -e-bers of the buy;bust

tea- approache" the scene at once an" arreste" Constantino, fro- .ho- SPO(

Taguia- recoere" the buy;bust -oney!?

Thereafter, Constantino .as brought to the police station .here the recoere" "rugs

an" -oney .ere turne" oer to the inestigator, SPO( Ta-ang! : The recoere"

"rugs .ere then -ar8e" .ith the initials 9$;79 an" 9$;(!9 The inci"ent .as recor"e"

in the police blotter .ith an inentory of the recoere" "rugs an" -oney!)

ater that eening, at aroun" ten ocloc8, P1Supt! Ro"rigue4 an" SPO( Ta-ang

sub-itte" to the Philippine National Police %PNP& Cri-e aboratory Serices, Ca-p

3arcelo $""uru, Tuguegarao City, a re>uest for laboratory ea-ination of t.o

plastic sachets .ith .hite crystalline substance -ar8e" as 9$;79 an" 9$;(9 to

"eter-ine the presence of "angerous "rugs+ as .ell as both han"s of Constantino,

one piece P<**!** bill, an" fie piecesP7**!** bills, to "eter-ine the presence of

the ultra iolet po."er!7* Per Che-istry Report No! D;*);(**<77 an" PhysicalI"entification Report No! PI;*@;(**<,7( prepare" by Police Senior Inspector

%P1SInsp!& 3ayra 3atote 3a"ria,75 6orensic Che-ist, the contents of the t.o plastic

sachets teste" positie for 3etha-pheta-ine Hy"rochlori"e .hile the other

speci-ens teste" positie for the presence of bright;yello. ultraiolet fluorescent

po."er!

Constantino "enie" the accusation against hi- an" asserte" that he .as -erely

fra-e";up!

$ccor"ing to Constantino, at aroun" )0** in the eening on 'anuary (*, (**<, he

.as en2oying a 2oyri"e .ith his frien", 'eff $barriao, on the latters -otorcycle,

.ithin the icinity of Caritan Centro! $fter 5* -inutes, Constantino "eci"e" to goho-e! =hile .al8ing along Reyno or Reynoilla St!, t.o ehicles su""enly stoppe",

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/mar2014/gr_199689_2014.html#fnt1
































one in front an" the other behin" hi-! 6ie -en, all in ciilian clothes, alighte" fro-

the t.o ehicles! T.o of the -en hel" Constantinos han"s, .hile another po8e" a

gun at hi-, as8ing hi- .here he ca-e fro- an" or"ering hi- to bring out the

shabu! Constantino ans.ere" that he "i" not 8no. .hat the -en .ere tal8ing

about! The -en then force" Constantino into one of the ehicles! Insi"e the ehicle,

one of the -en fris8e" an" searche" Constantino, an" tol" hi- that he .as being

arreste" for selling shabu! The -en, .ho .ere no. apparently police officers,

brought Constantino to the Tuguegarao City Police Station! $t the police station, the

police officers too8 Constantinos cellphone an" .allet! $lso at the police station,

one of the arresting police officers brought out t.o pieces of plastic sachets an"-oney an" turne" it oer to one of his co-panions! $t aroun" +05* in the eening,

the police officers brought Constantino to the PNP Cri-e aboratory, but nothing

happene" because he hear" that the person .ho .as suppose" to con"uct the

ea-ination .as not aroun", so, Constantino .as brought bac8 to the police

station!7@

The follo.ing "ay, 'anuary (7, (**<, the police officers again brought Constantino

to the PNP Cri-e aboratory! $long the .ay, one of the police escorts force"

Constantino to hol" a certain a-ount of -oney! Constantino trie" to resist but he

coul" not really "o anything because he .as han"cuffe"! $fter his ea-ination,

Constantino .as "etaine" an" .as tol" that he .as suspecte" of selling shabu!

The RTC pro-ulgate" its Decision on $pril 7<, (**), fin"ing Constantino guilty as

charge"! The trial court re2ecte" the argu-ents of the "efense, thus0

7! The Prosecution faile" to gie a "etaile" account of the arrange-ent .ith the

accuse" for the purchase of the shabu!

The Courts response0 The testi-ony of PO5 Do-ingo .as "etaile" enough,

corroborate" by other .itnesses! It is the "efense that has faile" to sho. in .hat

crucial "etail the prosecutions account is .anting!

(! The police officers categorically a"-itte" that they "i" not personally 8no. the

accuse" until they .ere at the allege" place of transaction!

The Courts response0 Substantie la. "oes not re>uire this the rules of ei"ence

"o not! Di" they 8no. he .as 'o2it Ges, fro- the "escription gien the infor-ant!

Do-ingo as8e" .hether he .as 'o2it! He ans.ere" 9Ges9!

5! The arresting officers faile" to co-ply .ith the re>uire-ents of $rticle II, Section

(7 of R!$! +7?< that re>uires that an inentory be ta8en an" that photographs be

ta8en of the ite-s sei4e"!

The Courts co--ent0 The Police Blotter #ntry No! *(:* enu-erates the ite-s

sei4e"! This, the Court hol"s to be substantial co-pliance! #en assu-ing, .ithouta"-itting, that not all the re>uire-ents -ay not hae been co-plie" .ith, these

o-issions "o not operate to eclu"e the ei"ence nor to cause suppression thereof!

They are "irectory, not -an"atory proisions!

@! The chain of custo"y .as not establishe" .ith certainty!

The Courts co--ent0 The chain is not "ifficult to trace, an" has been establishe"

by ei"ence, thus0

a! #hibit 9B90 The police blotter recor"ing that on (* 'anuary (**< at(7** hours, -entioning the t.o sachets of shabu .hich accor"ing to the

blotter the accuse" a"-itte" he han"e" oer to Do-ingo Do-ingo ha"

testifie" that the -ar8ings $;7 NBT an" $;( NBT .ere place" on the

sachets by Inestigator $lean"er Ta-ang

b! #hibit 9690 Date" 'anuary (*, (**<, a re>uest to the PNP Cri-e ab

Serices for the ea-ination of 9t.o plastic sachet %sic& .ith .hite

crystalline substance -ar8e" $7 an" $(9

c! #hibit 9D90 Che-istry Report No! D;*);(**< co-plete" (7 'anuary

(**< reporting a >ualitatie ea-ination of the contents of t.o heat;seale"

sachets -ar8e" as $7 NBT an" $( NBT an" i"entifying the substance as93etha-pheta-ine Hy"rochlori"e9!

<! There .as no prior coor"ination .ith PD#$!

The Courts response0 None .as nee"e"! #hibit 9H9 clearly ei"ences that SPO7

Bla>uera .as authori4e" to con"uct anti;"rug operations! Do-ingo also ans.ere"

the >uestion about coor"ination .ith PD#$ .hen he testifie"0 9During that ti-e 5

representaties of the Intelligence Operaties .ere "eputi4e" in the PD#$ in the

persons of Noel Taguia-, $rthur Bla>uera an" the Chief of Police!9

Her-anos testifie" in his behalf an" his testi-ony can be re"uce" to the follo.ing

story0

7 He .ent on a 2oy;ri"e that night .ith his frien" aboar" a -otorcycle

( Tiring, he alighte" an" starte" to .al8 along Reyno Villa Street

5 He .as accoste" by police officers .ho, at the ti-e, he "i" not 8no. to

be police officers

@ They too8 hi- to the police station an" pro"uce" the sachets

< Net "ay, .hile on the .ay to the Cri-e ab, they force" hi- to hol"-ar8e" bills, although he .as cuffe"!





$ll tol", it is a story that is -eant to en"eaor to eplain the circu-stances aroun"

the accuse"s arrest an" apprehension! 6or one thing, it is self;sering for another,

.e are not tol" any reason .hy the police officers shoul" hae .ante" to apprehen"

hi- a suppose"ly guiltless -an thir", the Court neer hear" the testi-ony of his

frien" .ith .ho- he .as suppose" to hae ha" a 2oy;ri"e that night! In su-, his

story "oes not conince this Court!7<%Citations o-itte"!&

The RTC i-pose" the follo.ing sentence upon Constantino0

=H#R#6OR#, the Court fin"s the accuse" guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of

Violation of Sec! <, $rt! II of R!$! +7?< an" sentences hi- to suffer the penalty of

I6# I3PRISON3#NT an" a fine of P<**,***!**!7?

3aintaining his innocence, Constantino appeale" to the Court of $ppeals, arguing

that0

7! The trial court graely erre" in giing full cre"ence to the testi-onies of

the prosecution .itnesses "espite the patent irregularities in the con"uct of

the buy;bust operation!

(! The trial court graely erre" in conicting accuse";appellant "espite theprosecutions failure to establish that chain of custo"y of the "rug

speci-ens allege"ly confiscate" fro- the accuse";appellant!

5! The trial court graely erre" in conicting the accuse";appellant "espite

the prosecutions failure to establish the i"entity of the prohibite" "rugs

constituting the corpus "elicti of the offense!

In its Decision "ate" 'uly (+, (*77, the Court of $ppeals affir-e" in toto the

2u"g-ent of coniction of the RTC against Constantino! The appellate court hel" that

Constantinos "efense of fra-e;up .as not .orthy of cre"ence as his ersion of the

inci"ent .as not at all corroborate"!

Constantino .as caught in flagrante "elicto selling shabu to PO5 Do-ingo, .ho

acte" as the poseur;buyer, therefore, he .as legally arreste" .ithout a .arrant! The

appellate court also foun" that the chain of custo"y of the shabu ha" been

presere" fro- the ti-e sai" "rugs .ere confiscate" fro- Constantino to the t i-e

the sa-e "rugs .ere "eliere" to the cri-e laboratory an" thereafter retriee" an"

presente" as ei"ence before the trial court! astly, the appellate court stresse" that

bet.een the positie an" categorical "eclarations of the prosecution .itnesses, on

one han", an" the unsubstantial "enial or negatie state-ents of the appellant, on

the other han", the for-er generally preails an" that negatie aer-ents,

unsubstantiate" by clear an" conincing ei"ence, "esere no .eight in la.,

especially is;a;is the ti-e;teste" presu-ption of regularity of perfor-ance of

official "uty on the part of the apprehen"ing officers!

In the en", the Court of $ppeals "ecree"0

=H#R#6OR#, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Tuguegarao City, Branch <,

"ate" 7< $pril (**), in Cri-inal Case No! 7*<7?, is $66IR3#D!7:

Conse>uently, Constantino co-es before this Court see8ing the reersal of his

coniction by the trial court an" the Court of $ppeals!

In his Supple-ental Brief, Constantino contests his coniction, aerringinconsistencies in the testi-onies of the prosecution .itnesses, particularly, on the

circu-stances of the -ar8ing of the t.o plastic sachets containing shabu allege"ly

confiscate" fro- hi-! Different people clai- to hae -a"e the -ar8ing 9NBT9 on

the t.o plastic sachets an" gae arious eplanations as to .hat the initials 9NBT9

stan" for! In short, Constantino argues that the prosecution faile" to establish a

crucial lin8 in the chain of custo"y of the shabu in this case!

The appeal is i-presse" .ith -erit!

$"-itte"ly, "enial is an inherently .ea8 "efense, consistently ie.e" .ith "isfaor

by the courts, being a self;sering negatie ei"ence! In ie., ho.eer, of the

constitutional presu-ption that an accuse" is innocent until the contrary is proenbeyon" reasonable "oubt, the bur"en lies on the prosecution to oerco-e such

presu-ption by presenting the re>uire" >uantu- of ei"ence! In so "oing, the

prosecution -ust rest on its o.n -erits an" -ust not rely on the .ea8ness of the

"efense!7)

In a prosecution for the sale of a "angerous "rug, the follo.ing ele-ents -ust be

proen0 %7& the i"entity of the buyer an" the seller, the ob2ect, an" the

consi"eration an" %(& the "eliery of the thing sol" an" the pay-ent therefor!

Si-ply put, 9KinL prosecutions for illegal sale of shabu, .hat is -aterial is the proof

that the transaction or sale actually too8 place, couple" .ith the presentation in

court of the corpus "elicti as ei"ence!97+ $n" in the prosecution of these offenses,

the pri-ary consi"eration is to ensure that the i"entity an" integrity of the sei4e""rugs an" other relate" articles hae been presere" fro- the ti-e they .ere

confiscate" fro- the accuse" until their presentation as ei"ence in court!(*

$rticle II, Section (7%7& of Republic $ct No! +7?< lays "o.n the proce"ure to be

follo.e" in the sei4ure an" custo"y of "angerous "rugs0

Section (7! Custo"y an" Disposition of Confiscate", Sei4e", an"1or Surren"ere"

Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlle" Precursors an"

#ssential Che-icals, Instru-ents1Paraphernalia an"1or aboratory #>uip-ent!

The PD#$ shall ta8e charge an" hae custo"y of all "angerous "rugs, plant sources

of "angerous "rugs, controlle" precursors an" essential che-icals, as .ell as

instru-ents1paraphernalia an"1or laboratory e>uip-ent so confiscate", sei4e"an"1or surren"ere", for proper "isposition in the follo.ing -anner0
















%7& The apprehen"ing tea- haing initial custo"y an" control of the "rugs shall,

i--e"iately after sei4ure an" confiscation, physically inentory an" photograph the

sa-e in the presence of the accuse" or the person1s fro- .ho- such ite-s .ere

confiscate" an"1or sei4e", or his1her representatie or counsel, a representatie

fro- the -e"ia an" the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'&, an" any electe" public official

.ho shall be re>uire" to sign the copies of the inentory an" be gien a copy

thereofK!L

$rticle II, Section (7%a& of the I-ple-enting Rules an" Regulations %IRR& of

Republic $ct No! +7?< "escribes in -ore "etail ho. the foregoing proce"ure is to be

applie"0

S#CTION (7! Custo"y an" Disposition of Confiscate", Sei4e" an"1or Surren"ere"

Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlle" Precursors an"

#ssential Che-icals, Instru-ents1Paraphernalia an"1or aboratory #>uip-ent!

The PD#$ shall ta8e charge an" hae custo"y of all "angerous "rugs, plant sources

of "angerous "rugs, controlle" precursors an" essential che-icals, as .ell as

instru-ents1paraphernalia an"1or laboratory e>uip-ent so confiscate", sei4e"

an"1or surren"ere", for proper "isposition in the follo.ing -anner0

%a& The apprehen"ing officer1tea- haing initial custo"y an" control of the "rugs

shall, i--e"iately after sei4ure an" confiscation, physically inentory an"

photograph the sa-e in the presence of the accuse" or the person1s fro- .ho-

such ite-s .ere confiscate" an"1or sei4e", or his1her representatie or counsel, a

representatie fro- the -e"ia an" the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'&, an" any

electe" public official .ho shall be re>uire" to sign the copies of the inentory an"

be gien a copy thereof Proi"e", that the physical inentory an" photograph shall

be con"ucte" at the place .here the search .arrant is sere" or at the nearest

police station or at the nearest office of the apprehen"ing officer1tea-, .hicheer is

practicable, in case of .arrantless sei4ures Proi"e", further, that non;co-pliance

.ith these re>uire-ents un"er 2ustifiable groun"s, as long as the integrity an" the

ei"entiary alue of the sei4e" ite-s are properly presere" by the apprehen"ing

officer1tea-, shall not ren"er oi" an" inali" such sei4ures of an" custo"y oer

sai" ite-sK!L

=hile police officers are en2oine" to strictly co-ply .ith the proce"ure prescribe" by

la., the IRR also eplicitly ecuses non;co-pliance un"er 2ustifiable groun"s, but

only if the integrity an" ei"entiary alue of the sei4e" ite-s hae been properly

presere" by the apprehen"ing officers! The integrity an" ei"entiary alue of

sei4e" ite-s are properly presere" for as long as the chain of custo"y of the sa-e

are "uly establishe"!

Section 7%b& of Dangerous Drugs Boar" Regulation No! 7, series of (**(, (7 "efines

9chain of custo"y9 as follo.s0

Chain of Custo"y -eans the "uly recor"e" authori4e" -oe-ents an" custo"y of

sei4e" "rugs or controlle" che-icals or plant sources of "angerous "rugs or

laboratory e>uip-ent of each stage, fro- the ti-e of sei4ure1confiscation to receipt

in the forensic laboratory to safe8eeping to presentation in court for "estruction!

Such recor" of -oe-ents an" custo"y of sei4e" ite- shall inclu"e the i"entity an"

signature of the person .ho hel" te-porary custo"y of the sei4e" ite-, the "ate

an" ti-e .hen such transfer of custo"y .ere -a"e in the course of safe8eeping an"

use in court as ei"ence, an" the final "isposition!

In 3allillin ! People,(( the Court "iscusse" ho. the chain of custo"y of sei4e" ite-s

is establishe"0

$s a -etho" of authenticating ei"ence, the chain of custo"y rule re>uires that the

a"-ission of an ehibit be prece"e" by ei"ence sufficient to support a fin"ing that

the -atter in >uestion is .hat the proponent clai-s it to be! It .oul" inclu"e

testi-ony about eery lin8 in the chain, fro- the -o-ent the ite- .as pic8e" up to

the ti-e it is offere" into ei"ence, in such a .ay that eery person .ho touche"

the ehibit .oul" "escribe ho. an" fro- .ho- it .as receie", .here it .as an"

.hat happene" to it .hile in the .itness possession, the con"ition in .hich it .as

receie" an" the con"ition in .hich it .as "eliere" to the net lin8 in the chain!

These .itnesses .oul" then "escribe the precautions ta8en to ensure that there ha"

been no change in the con"ition of the ite- an" no opportunity for so-eone not inthe chain to hae possession of the sa-e! %Citations o-itte"!&

Thus, the follo.ing lin8s -ust be establishe" in the chain of custo"y in a buy;bust

situation0 first, the sei4ure an" -ar8ing, if practicable, of the illegal "rug recoere"

fro- the accuse" by the apprehen"ing officer secon", the turn oer of the illegal

"rug sei4e" by the apprehen"ing officer to the inestigating officer thir", the turn

oer by the inestigating officer of the illegal "rug to the forensic che-ist for

laboratory ea-ination an" fourth, the turn oer an" sub-ission of the -ar8e"

illegal "rugs sei4e" fro- the forensic che-ist to the court!(5

$fter a careful scrutiny of the testi-onies of the prosecution .itnesses, the Court

fin"s glaring inconsistencies affecting the integrity of the shabu purporte"lyconfiscate" fro- Constantino! The inconsistent testi-onies of PO5 Do-ingo, PO5

Hernan"e4, an" P1SInsp! Tulauan as to .ho, .hen, an" .here the t.o plastic

sachets of shabu .ere -ar8e" lea" the Court to >uestion .hether the t.o plastic

sachets of shabu i"entifie" in court .ere the ery sa-e ones confiscate" fro-

Constantino! The "oubtful -ar8ings alrea"y bro8e the chain of custo"y of the sei4e"

shabu at a ery early stage!

To recall, the first crucial lin8 in the chain of custo"y is sei4ure an" -ar8ing of the

illegal "rug! In this case, PO5 Do-ingo, as poseur;buyer, receie" t.o plastic

sachets of shabu fro- Constantino in echange for P7,***! Ho.eer, PO5 Do-ingo

hi-self "i" not put any -ar8ings on the t.o plastic sachets of shabu! Instea", upon

arrial of the buy;bust tea- .ith Constantino at the police station, PO5 Do-ingoturne" oer the t.o plastic sachets of shabu to the inestigator, SPO( Ta-ang, .ho









.as also a -e-ber of the buy;bust tea-! PO5 Do-ingo testifie" that it .as SPO(

Ta-ang .ho put the -ar8ing 9NBT9 on the sai" sachets of shabu! Belo. are the

ecerpts fro- PO5 Do-ingos testi-ony0

J If that plastic sachets .hich .as sol" to you by Her-anos Constantino is sho.n

to you .ill you be able to i"entify the sa-e

$ Ges, -aa-!

J Ho. .ere you able to i"entify the plastic sachets

$ There is an initials %sic&, -aa-!

J =hat initials are you referring to

$ $;7 initial NBT an" $;( initial NBT!

J =ho place" those initials in the plastic sachets

$ The Inestigator, -aa-!

J $n" .ho is the inestigator

$ $lean"er Ta-ang, -aa-!

J =here "i" he place those initials

$ In the police station after the apprehension, -aa-!(@ %#-phasis supplie"!&

Ho.eer, PO5 Hernan"e4, another -e-ber of the buy;bust tea-, categorically

pointe" to SPO( Taguia-, also a -e-ber of the buy;bust tea-, as the one .ho put

the -ar8ing 9NBT9 on the plastic sachets upon the tea-s return to the police

station, thus0

PROS! NICO$S0

J During the buy bust operation you state" that the accuse" han"e" to the poseur

buyer in the person of PO5 Rolan"o Do-ingo t.o plastic sachets containing as you

clai-e" -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e, hae you seen these plastic sachets at

that ti-e .hen they han"e" to PO5 Rolan"o Do-ingo

$ Ges, sir!

J If these t.o plastic sachets .ill be sho.n to you again to"ay .ill you be able to

tell that these t.o plastic sachets .ere the sa-e plastic sachets that .ere han"e"

by the accuse" to PO5 Rolan"o Do-ingo

$ Ges, sir!

J I a- sho.ing to you these t.o plastic sachets 8in"ly tell us if these are the plastic

sachets that .ere han"e" to PO5 Rolan"o Do-ingo

$ These are the ones, sir!

J =hy "o you say that these are the t.o plastic sachets han"e" by the accuse"

$ Because I .as there an" I sa. the accuse" han"e" the t.o plastic sachets to PO5

Rolan"o Do-ingo, sir!

J =hy "o you 8no. that these are the sa-e plastic sachets

$ These are the ones, sir!

J 3r! =itness, there are -ar8ings on these t.o plastic sachets, "o you 8no. .hose

-ar8ings are these

$ It .as Noel B! Taguia-, sir!

The .itness is pointing to the -ar8ing NBT partly hi""en!

COFRT0

J =ho is Noel B! Taguia-

$ $ -e-ber of the buy bust tea- also, sir!

PROS! NICO$S0

J Gou state" this NBT .as place" by one Noel B! Taguia-, .hy "o you 8no. that he

.as the one .ho place" this

$ Because I .as present "uring that ti-e .hen he place" his initial, sir!





J Do you 8no. .hen this Noel B! Taguia- place" those initials on those t.o plastic

sachets

$ $fter .e con"ucte" the buy bust operation, sir!

J Ho. soon Noel B! Taguia- place" those initials after the con"uct of the buy bust

operation

$ $fter a fe. hours, sir!

J =here "i" he place those initials

$ In our office, sir!(< %#-phasis supplie"!&

To co-plicate things een further, P1SInsp Tulauan,(? the 6orensic Che-ist, also

"eclare" before the trial court that the -ar8ing 9NBT9 on the t.o plastic sachets of

shabu .ere -a"e by SPO5 Nelson B! Ta-aray %Ta-aray&, the "uty officer .ho

receie" the speci-ens at the cri-e laboratory! P1SInsp! Tulauan testifie"0

PROS! ISR$#0

J =hen you receie" these t.o speci-ens 3a"a- =itness, .ill you please tell us

the physical appearance of these ite-s .hen you receie" the sa-e

$ They .ere heat;seale" an" .ith -ar8ings 9$;79 an" 9$;(,9 your Honor!

B $n" .ill you please point to us these -ar8ings 9$;79 an" 9$;(9 .hen you receie"

these ite-s 3a"a- =itness

$ This is the -ar8ings 9$;79 an" 9$;(,9 3aa-!

INT#RPR#T#R0

The .itness is pointing to the -ar8ings 9$;79 an" 9$;(9 .ith the use of a blac8

pentel pen!

PROS! ISR$#0

J There is another -ar8ing in this plastic sachet 3a"a- =itness -ar8e" as NBT,

.hat is this -ar8ing all about

$ That is the -ar8ing of SPO5 Nelson B! Ta-aray, 3aa-!

J Is he authori4e" to -a8e the necessary -ar8ing .hich .as re>ueste" to be

ea-ine" 3a"a- =itness

$ Ges, 3aa- because he is the one .ho receie" the speci-en fro- the one .ho

"elier it, 3aa-!

J In this secon" plastic sachet 3a"a- =itness .hich you i"entifie" earlier, that

there is a -ar8ing 9$;7,9 there is another -ar8ing NBT, .hat is this -ar8ing all

about 3a"a- =itness

$ That is the -ar8ing of SPO5 Nelson B! Ta-aray, 3aa-! (: %#-phases supplie"!&

On cross;ea-ination, P1SInsp! Tulauan confir-e" her preious "eclaration that

SPO5 Ta-aray ha" clai-e" -a8ing the -ar8ing on the sachets of shabu0

$tty! $>uino

3a"a- =itness, .ith respect to that -ar8ing -a"e .hich are 9$79 an" 9$;(9, they

are not your -ar8ings, is it not

$ Ges, sir!

J $n" .ith respect also to that NBT -ar8e" an" place" in that ehibit .hich you

hae earlier i"entifie", you "i" not see this "uty officer place" his -ar8ings thereon,

is it not

$ Ges sir but I as8e" hi- .ho place" that -ar8ing an" he sai" that he .as the one

.ho place" the initial NBT, sir!()

The Court alrea"y e-phasi4e" in People ! Qa8aria(+ the i-portance of -ar8ing the

sei4e" ite- right after sei4ure0

Crucial in proing the chain of custo"y is the -ar8ing of the sei4e" "angerous "rugs

or other relate" ite-s i--e"iately after they are sei4e" fro- the accuse", for the

-ar8ing upon sei4ure is the starting point in the custo"ial lin8 that succee"ing

han"lers of the ei"ence .ill use as reference point! 3oreoer, the alue of -ar8ing

of the ei"ence is to separate the -ar8e" ei"ence fro- the corpus of all other

si-ilar or relate" ei"ence fro- the ti-e of sei4ure fro- the accuse" until

"isposition at the en" of cri-inal procee"ings, obiating s.itching, 9planting9 or

conta-ination of ei"ence! $ failure to -ar8 at the ti-e of ta8ing of initial custo"y

i-perils the integrity of the chain of custo"y that the la. re>uires!1âwphi1 %Citation

o-itte"!&

Herein, the prosecution is co-pletely silent as to .hy PO5 Do-ingo, the poseur;buyer, "espite haing i--e"iate custo"y of the t.o plastic sachets of shabu















purchase" fro- Constantino, faile" to i--e"iately -ar8 the sei4e" "rugs before

turning oer the custo"y of the sa-e to another police officer! This lapse in

proce"ure opene" the "oor for confusion an" "oubt as to the i"entity of the "rugs

actually sei4e" fro- Constantino "uring the buy;bust an" the ones presente" before

the trial court, especially consi"ering that three "ifferent people, "uring the interal,

suppose"ly receie" an" -ar8e" the sa-e! To clarify the -atter, the prosecution

coul" hae presente" as . itness either SPO( Ta-ang or SPO( Taguia- to "irectly

ali"ate the -ar8ing in court, but unfortunately, the prosecution chose to "ispense

.ith the testi-onies of both officers! This o-ission "i-inishe" the i-portance of the

-ar8ings as the reference point for the subse>uent han"ling of the ei"ence! $s aconse>uence, an ob2ectie person coul" no. 2ustifiably suspect the shabu ulti-ately

presente" as ei"ence in court to be plante" or conta-inate"!5*

The failure of the prosecution to establish the ei"ences chain of custo"y is fatal to

its case as the Court can no longer consi"er or een safely assu-e that the integrity

an" ei"entiary alue of the confiscate" "angerous "rug .ere properly presere"!57

In light of the foregoing, Constantino is ac>uitte" of the cri-e charge", not because

the Court accor"s cre"ence to his "efense of fra-e;up, but because the prosecution

faile" to "ischarge its bur"en of proing his guilt beyon" reasonable "oubt!

=H#R#6OR#, the appeal is /R$NT#D! The Decision "ate" 'uly (+, (*77 of the Court

of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR!;H!C! No! *55<5, affir-ing the Decision "ate" $pril 7<,

(**) of the Regional Trial Court, Branch < of Tuguegarao City, Cagayan, in Cri-inal

Case No! 7*<7?, is R#V#RS#D an" S#T $SID#! $ppellant Her-anos Constantino, 'r!

y Binayug, a!8!a! 9'o2it,9 is $CJFITT#D for failure of the prosecution to proe his

guilt beyon" reasonable "oubt an" is ORD#R#D to be i--e"iately release" fro-

"etention unless he is confine" for another la.ful cause!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 1*1360 M&r 10, 2014


s!

S)ERWIN IS AELLANE"A, $ccuse";$ppellant!

D # C I S I O N

"EL CASTILLO, J.:

In prosecutions inoling narcotics, the narcotic substance itself constitutes the

corpus "elicti of the offense an" the fact of its eistence is ital to sustain a

2u"g-ent of coniction beyon" reasonable "oubt! The prosecution is "uty;boun" to

establish .ith un.aering eactitu"e that the "angerous "rug presente" in court as

ei"ence against the accuse" is the sa-e prohibite" substance sei4e" fro- hi-!

6or final reie. is the Septe-ber ((, (**+ Decision7 of the Court of $ppeals %C$& in

C$;/!R! CR;H!C! No! *55@) .hich affir-e" the Regional Trial CourtAs %RTC& 'anuary

57, (**) Decision( in Cri-inal Case No! :<<< fin"ing appellant Sher.in Bis y

$ellane"a %appellant& guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of iolating Section

<,5 $rticle II of Republic $ct %R$& No! +7?<@ an" sentencing hi- to suffer the penalty

of life i-prison-ent an" to pay a fine ofP<**,***!**!

6actual $ntece"ents

$ppellant .as charge" before the San 6ernan"o, a Fnion RTC, Branch (+ .ith

iolation of Section <, $rticle II of R$ +7?< co--itte" as follo.s0

That on or about the ()th "ay of Noe-ber (**?, in the City of San 6ernan"o,

Proince of a Fnion, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the

aboeK;Lna-e" accuse" "i" then an" there, . illfully, unla.fully an" feloniously

"istribute, sell an" "elier three %5& heat seale" transparent plastic sachetKsL

containing -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e other.ise 8no.n as 9shabu9, .ith a

correspon"ing .eight of Q#RO POINT Q#RO 6ORTG THR## %*!*@5& gra- Q#RO

POINT Q#RO SIT##N %*!*7?& gra- an" Q#RO POINT Q#RO T#N %*!*7*& gra- .ith

a total .eight of Q#RO POINT Q#RO SITG NIN# %*!*?+& gra- to PO( 3anuel

#spe2o .ho pose" as the poseur;buyer thereof an" in consi"eration of sai" shabu,















use" -ar8e" -oney, a piece of One thousan" peso bill %P7,***!**& .ith serial

nu-ber #B )+5*):, .ithout first securing the necessary per-it, license fro- the

proper goern-ent agency!

CONTR$RG TO $=!<

On 'anuary (5, (**:, appellant assiste" by his counsel, plea"e" not guilty to the

cri-e charge"!

Version of the Prosecution

On Noe-ber (?, (**?, a ciilian infor-ant tippe" the San 6ernan"o City Police

Station about the allege" "rug pushing actiity of appellant at his resi"ence in

Pag"alagan Norte, San 6ernan"o City, a Fnion! Hence, a tea- co-pose" of Police

Officers 3anuel #spe2o %#spe2o&, 'ose $rce %$rce& an" 'oselito Case- %Case-& .ent

to the area on the sa-e "ay to con"uct a sureillance! They staye" at a store about

7* -eters a.ay fro- appellants house an" fro- there sa. people co-ing in an"

out! $nother sureillance con"ucte" by the sa-e tea- on the follo.ing eening

confir-e" that "rug actiities .ere in"ee" happening in that place!

The sai" police officers i--e"iately reporte" the -atter to their superior .hoor"ere" the- to con"uct a buy;bust operation on Noe-ber (), (**?! #spe2o .as

"esignate" as poseur;buyer .hile $rce an" Case- .ere to sere as bac8;ups!

6ollo.ing the usual proce"ure, #spe2o .as proi"e" .ith a P7,***!** bill bearing

the initials 93C#9 as -ar8e" -oney!

$t about 7*0@* p!-!, the tea- procee"e" to the target area on a tricycle! Fpon

arriing at the locus cri-inis, $rce an" Case- poste" the-seles at a store near

appellants house .hile #spe2o approache" appellant .ho .as stan"ing in front of

his house! He tol" hi-, 9Par"s pa8i8uha ng isang bulto!9 $ppellant loo8e" at #spe2o

an" as8e" 9.here is your -oney9 $fter #spe2o han"e" the P7,***!** bill to

appellant, the latter .ent insi"e the house! He e-erge" after a .hile an" gae

#spe2o three plastic sachets place" in another plastic container! Conince" that the.hite crystalline substance insi"e the plastic sachets is shabu, #spe2o -a"e the pre;

arrange" signal by putting his han" on top of his hea"! $t once, #spe2o intro"uce"

hi-self together .ith $rce an" Case- .ho alrea"y rushe" to assist hi-, as

-e-bers of the San 6ernan"o City Police! 6orth.ith, appellant .as place" un"er

arrest an" apprise" of his constitutional rights!

Thereafter, he .as brought to the police station .herein a further search on hi- by

#spe2o yiel"e" alu-inu- foils?an" the -ar8e" -oney!

In the -eanti-e, #spe2o -ar8e" the three plastic sachets he bought fro- appellant

.ith the initials 93C;7,9 93C;(9 an" 93C;5!9: $fter.ar"s, the tea- brought the

Re>uest for aboratory #a-ination)

together .ith the confiscate" ite-s to theRegional Chief of the PNP Cri-e aboratory Serice! The results of the laboratory

ea-ination on the speci-en yiel"e" positie for the presence of -etha-pheta-ine

hy"rochlori"e or shabu, a "angerous "rug!+

Version of the Defense

$ppellant "enie" all the allegations against hi-! He clai-e" that .hile he .as going

out of his house at aroun" 7*0** p!-! of Noe-ber (), (**?, #spe2o, .ho- he "i"

not 8no. at the ti-e, su""enly grabbe" hi-! He .as then ta8en to a place near the

high.ay .here he .as fris8e"! =hen nothing .as foun" on his possession, he .as

ta8en to the police station at Pag"alagan! 6ro- there, he .as .his8e" a.ay to the

-ain police station in San 6ernan"o City on the pretet that he .oul" be as8e" on

so-ething an" .oul" be release" the follo.ing "ay! Fpon reaching the -ain police

station, ho.eer, #spe2o sho.e" hi- three alu-inu- foils an" three plastic sachets

containing .hite crystalline substance .hich .ere allege"ly foun" on hi-!

On cross ea-ination, appellant clai-e" to not 8no. #spe2o, $rce an" Case- prior

to the Noe-ber (), (**? inci"ent! That ecept for the sai" inci"ent, there .as no

other reason for the sai" police officers to file a case against hi-!

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

$ccor"ing full faith an" cre"ence to the ersion of the prosecution, the RTC foun"

that the ele-ents necessary to proe the illegal sale of "angerous "rugs hae been

sufficiently establishe"!7* It "ebun8e" appellants "enial after consi"ering the

positie testi-onies of the prosecution .itnesses in line .ith the presu-ption that

la. enforce-ent officers hae perfor-e" their "uties in a regular -anner!

Conse>uently, the RTC foun" appellant guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-e

charge" in its Decision77 of 'anuary 57, (**), the "ispositie portion of .hich rea"s0

=H#R#6OR#, the Court fin"s the accuse" Sher.in Bis, /FITG as charge" an"

sentences hi- to suffer the penalty of ife I-prison-ent an" to pay a fine of

Php<**,***!** an" to pay costs!1âwphi1

The three %5& sachets of shabu .ith a total .eight of *!*?+ gra- is hereby

confiscate" an" or"ere" turne" oer to PD#$ for proper "isposition!

SO ORD#R#D!7(

Ruling of the Court of $ppeals

On appeal, appellant >uestione" the RTC Decision on the groun" that his guilt .as

not proe" beyon" reasonable "oubt! He also aerre" that the police officers faile"

to regularly perfor- their official functions!




















Concurring .ith the fin"ings an" conclusions of the RTC, the C$ affir-e" the sai"

lo.er courts 2u"g-ent in its no. assaile" Decision75 of Septe-ber ((, (**+,

"isposing thusly0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the 'anuary 57, (**) Decision of the Regional

Trial Court of San 6ernan"o, a Fnion, Branch (+, in Cri-inal Case No! :<<<, is

$66IR3#D!

SO ORD#R#D!7@

Fnable to accept both lo.er courts er"ict of coniction, appellant is no. before

this Court for final "eter-ination of the ery sa-e issues he sub-itte" before the

C$!

Our Ruling

=e fin" no -erit in the appeal!

Cre"ibility of .itnesses not affecte" by -inor inconsistencies!

$ppellant points out inconsistencies in the testi-onies of prosecution .itnesses

#spe2o an" $rce, to .it0 %7& #spe2o testifie" that he foun" the alu-inu- foils an"

the -ar8e" -oney tuc8e" on appellants .aistline .hile $rce testifie" that he sa.

#spe2o fris8 appellant an" foun" the speci-en in the latters poc8et %(& #spe2o

state" that appellant .as then .earing bas8etball shorts .hile $rce "escribe" hi-

as .earing a si;poc8et short pants! $ppellant argues that these inconsistent

state-ents ren"er #spe2o an" $rce incre"ible .itnesses!

The Court is not conince"! =hile there are in"ee" -inor contra"ictions in #spe2o

an" $rces testi-onies, the sa-e are neertheless inconse>uential an" "o not

"etract fro- the proen ele-ents of the offense of illegal sale of "angerous "rugs!

$s the C$ correctly obsere"0

The foregoing inconsistencies, ho.eer, relate only to -inor -atters an" "o not

touch on the essence of the cri-e! 'urispru"ence is replete .ith pronounce-ent by

the Supre-e Court that a fe. "iscrepancies an" inconsistencies in the testi-onies

of .itnesses referring to -inor "etails .hich "o not touch the essence of the cri-e

"o not i-pair their cre"ibility!7<

It is no. too .ell;settle" to re>uire etensie "ocu-entation that 9inconsistencies in

the testi-onies of .itnesses, .hich refer only to -inor "etails an" collateral

-atters, "o not affect the eracity an" .eight of their testi-onies .here there is

consistency in relating the principal occurrence an" the positie i"entification of the

accuse"!97?Significantly, in the case at bench, the testi-onies of the sai" .itnesses

for the prosecution .ere in har-ony .ith respect to their positie i"entification of

appellant as the one .ho sol" the illegal "rugs to #spe2o, the poseur;buyer, in a

planne" buy;bust operation, as .ell as to the other surroun"ing circu-stances that

transpire" "uring the sai" operation!

Chain of custo"y properly establishe"!

$ppellant posits that the prosecution "i" not strictly co-ply .ith the proce"ures lai"

"o.n in Section (7, $rticle II of R$ +7?< an" its I-ple-enting Rules an"

Regulations regar"ing the physical inentory an" photograph of the sei4e" ite-s!

Non;co-pliance there.ith, he argues, casts "oubt on the ali"ity of his arrest an"

the i"entity of the suspecte" shabu allege"ly bought an" confiscate" fro- hi-!

On the -atter of han"ling the confiscate" illegal "rugs after a buy;bust operation,

Section (7%7&, $rticle II of R$ +7?< proi"es0

%7& The apprehen"ing tea- haing initial custo"y an" control of the "rugs shall,

i--e"iately after sei4ure an" confiscation, physically inentory an" photograph the

sa-e in the presence of the accuse" or the person1s fro- .ho- such ite-s .ere

confiscate" an"1or sei4e", or his1her representatie or counsel, a representatie

fro- the -e"ia an" the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'&, an" any electe" public official

.ho shall be re>uire" to sign the copies of the inentory an" be gien a copy

thereof

$ccor"ingly, Section (7%a& of the I-ple-enting Rules an" Regulations of R$ +7?<

.hich i-ple-ents the afore;>uote" proision rea"s0

%a& The apprehen"ing officer1tea- haing initial custo"y an" control of the "rugs

shall, i--e"iately after sei4ure an" confiscation, physically inentory an"

photograph the sa-e in the presence of the accuse" or the person1s fro- .ho-

such ite-s .ere confiscate" an"1or sei4e" or his1her representatie or counsel, a

representatie fro- the -e"ia an" the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'&, an" any

electe" public official .ho shall be re>uire" to sign the copies of the inentory an"

be gien a copy thereof Proi"e", that the physical inentory an" photograph shallbe con"ucte" at the place .here the search .arrant is sere" or at the nearest

police station or at the nearest office of the apprehen"ing officer1tea-, .hicheer is

practicable, in case of .arrantless sei4ures Proi"e", further that non;co-pliance

.ith these re>uire-ents un"er 2ustifiable groun"s, as long as the integrity an" the

ei"entiary alue of the sei4e" ite-s are properly presere" by the apprehen"ing

officer1tea-, shall not ren"er oi" an" inali" such sei4ures of an" custo"y oer

sai" ite-s

Case la. has it that non;co-pliance .ith the aboe>uote" proision of R$ +7?< an"

its I-ple-enting Rules an" Regulations is not fatal an" .ill not ren"er an accuse"s

arrest illegal or the ite-s sei4e"1confiscate" fro- hi- ina"-issible! 9=hat is of

ut-ost i-portance is the preseration of the integrity an" the ei"entiary alue of












the sei4e" ite-s as the sa-e .oul" be utili4e" in the "eter-ination of the guilt or

innocence of the accuse"!97:

In the present case, the totality of the prosecutions ei"ence sho.s the integrity of

the "rugs sei4e" to be intact!1âwphi1The i"entity of the "rugs .as proen an" the

chain of its custo"y an" possession has been "uly accounte" for an" not bro8en!

This can be gleane" fro- the testi-onies of #spe2o an" $rce .ho narrate" that fro-

the -o-ent the ite-s .ere sei4e" fro- appellant, the sa-e .ere brought to the

police station .here #spe2o -ar8e" the- .ith his initials 93C;7,9 93C;(9 an" 93C;

5,9 properly inentorie", an", together .ith the laboratory re>uest, .erei--e"iately "eliere" by #spe2o hi-self to the PNP Cri-e aboratory for

ea-ination to "eter-ine the presence of "angerous "rugs! Police Inspector

3elanie 'oy Or"oo con"ucte" an ea-ination on the speci-ens sub-itte" .ith the

correspon"ing -ar8ings an" conclu"e" that the three heat seale" transparent

plastic sachets containe" -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e or shabu, a "angerous

"rug! Inci"entally, this conclusion is bolstere" by the "efenses a"-ission7) of the

eistence an" "ue eecution of the re>uest for laboratory ea-ination, the

Che-istry Report an" the speci-ens sub-itte"! 3oreoer, #spe2o, .hen confronte"

"uring trial, i"entifie" the three plastic sachets containing .hite crystalline

substance as the ery sa-e ite-s confiscate" fro- the appellant!7+ Fn"er the

situation, this Court fin"s no circu-stance .hatsoeer that .oul" hint any "oubt as

to the i"entity, integrity an" ei"entiary alue of the ite-s sub2ect -atter of thiscase! 9Besi"es, the integrity of the ei"ence is presu-e" to be presere" unless

there is a sho.ing of ba" faith, ill .ill or proof that the ei"ence has been ta-pere"

.ith9(* an" in such case, the bur"en of proof rests on the appellant!(7 Here,

appellant -iserably faile" to "ischarge this bur"en! 3oreoer, an" as aptly obsere"

by the C$, appellant "i" not seasonably >uestion these proce"ural gaps before the

trial court! Suffice it to say that ob2ection to ei"ence cannot be raise" for the first

ti-e on appeal!((

In fine, the prosecutions ei"ence positiely i"entifie" appellant as the seller of

.hite crystalline substance foun" to be -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e or shabu,

a "angerous "rug, for P7,***!** to #spe2o, a police officer .ho acte" as a poseur;

buyer in a buy;bust operation! The plastic sachets containing the sai" substancepresente" "uring the trial as #hibits 96;7 to 6;59 .ere positiely i"entifie" by

#spe2o as the sa-e substance .hich .ere sol" an" "eliere" to hi- by appellant

"uring the sai" operation!

$ppellants "efense of "enial properly re2ecte"!

$ppellants "efense hinges principally on "enial! But such a "efense is unaailing

consi"ering that appellant .as caught in f lagrante "elicto in a legiti-ate buy;bust

operation! 9The "efense of "enial or fra-e;up, li8e alibi, has been inariably ie.e"

by the courts .ith "isfaor for it can 2ust as easily be concocte" an" is a co--on

an" stan"ar" "efense ploy in -ost prosecutions for iolation of the Dangerous

Drugs $ct!9(5

Penalty

Section < of R$ +7?< proi"es the penalty for the illegal sale of "angerous "rugs,

i40

Section <! Sale, Tra"ing, $"-inistration, Dispensation, Deliery, Distribution an"

Transporation of Dangerous Drugs an"1or Controlle" Precursors an" #ssential

Che-icals! ;The penalty of life i-prison-ent to "eath an" a fine ranging fro- 6ie

hun"re" thousan" pesos %P<**,***!**& to Ten -illion pesos %P7*,***,***!**& shall

be i-pose" upon any person, .ho, unless authori4e" by la., shall se ll, tra"e,

a"-inister, "ispense, "elier, gie a.ay to another, "istribute, "ispatch in transit or

transport any "angerous "rug, inclu"ing any an" all species of opiu- poppy

regar"less of the >uantity an" purity inole", or shall act as a bro8er in any of such

transactions!

Pursuant to the aboe;>uote" proision of the la., appellant .as properly

sentence" by the lo.er courts to suffer the penalty of life i-prison-ent an" to pay

a fine off P<**,***!**!

=H#R#6OR#, the Decision "ate" Septe-ber ((, (**+ of the Court of $ppeals in C$;

/!R! CR;H!C! No! *55@), .hich affir-e" the Decision "ate" 'anuary 57, (**) of the

Regional Trial Court, Branch (+, San 6ernan"o City, a Fnion in Cri-inal Case No!

:<<< fin"ing accuse";appellant SH#R=IN BIS y $V#$N#D$ guilty beyon"

reasonable "oubt of Violation of Section <, $rticle II of Republic $ct No! +7?< an"

sentencing hi- to suffer the penalty of ife I-prison-ent an" to pay a fine

off P<**,***!**, is hereby $66IR3#D!

SO ORD#R#D!


3anila

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 200304 !&'&r 15, 2014

PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Plaintiff;$ppellee,s!"ONAL" AS9UE# SAN"IGAN : "ON, $ccuse";$ppellant,

D # C I S I O N

















LEONAR"O8"E CASTRO, J.:

The case before this Court is an appeal fro- the Decision7 "ate" 3ay 57, (*77 ofthe Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR!;H!C! No! *@(*7! Sai" "ecision affir-e" .ith-o"ification the 'oint Decision( "ate" $ugust ? (**+ of the Regional Trial Court%RTC& of 3anila, Branch @7, in Cri-inal Case Nos! +);7?@7:@ an" +);7?@7:<, .hichconicte" the appellant Donal" Vas>ue4 y San"igan of the cri-es of illegal sale an"illegal possession of regulate" "rugs un"er Sections 7< an" 7? $rticle III of Republic$ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e", other.ise 8no.n as the Dangerous Drugs $ct of 7+:(!

Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:@ ste--e" fro- a charge of iolation of Section 7<$rticle III of Republic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e",5 .hich .as allege"ly co--itte" asfollo.s0

That on or about $pril 5, 7++) in the City of 3anila, Philippines, the sai" accuse"not haing been authori4e" by la. to sell, "ispense, "elier, transport or "istributeany regulate" "rug, "i" then an" there K.illfullyL, unla.fully an" 8no.ingly sell oroffer for sale, "ispense, "elier, transport or "istribute @<!@? gra-s, @@!(: gra-s,@<!5@ gra-s, <7!@< gra-s, @7!5( gra-s an" (*!7@ gra-s or .ith a total .eight ofT=O HFNDR#D 6ORTG;S#V#N POINT NIN#TG;#I/HT %(@:!+)& gra-s containe" insi %?& transparent plastic sachets of .hite crystalline substance 8no.n as 9Shabu9containing -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e, .hich is a regulate" "rug!@

Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:<, on the other han", arose fro- an allege" iolation ofSection 7?, $rticle III of Republic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e",< .hich .as sai" to beco--itte" in this -anner0

That on or about $pril 5, 7++) in the City of 3anila, Philippines, the sai" accuse".ithout being authori4e" by la. to possess or use any regulate" "rug, "i" then an"there K.illfullyL, unla.fully an" 8no.ingly hae in his possession an" un"er hiscusto"y an" control 7!?7 gra-s, *!<) gra-s, *!(+ gra-s, *!*+ Kgra-sL, *!7*gra-s, *!7: gra-s, *!(7 gra-s, *!(@ gra-s, *!7( gra-s, *!*? gra-s, *!*@ gra-s,K*L!<7 gra-s or all .ith a total .eight of four point 4ero three gra-s of .hitecrystalline substance containe" in t.ele %7(& transparent plastic sachets 8no.n as9SH$BF9 containing -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e, a regulate" "rug, .ithout thecorrespon"ing license or prescription thereof !?

Initially, Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:< .as raffle" to the RTC of 3anila, Branch (5!Fpon -otion: of the appellant, ho.eer, sai" case .as allo.e" to be consoli"ate".ith Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:@ in the RTC of 3anila, Branch @7!) Onarraign-ent, the appellant plea"e" not guilty to both charges!+ The pre;trialconference of the cases .as hel" on 'uly (:, 7++), but the sa-e .as ter-inate".ithout the parties entering into any stipulation of facts!7*

During the trial of the cases, the prosecution presente" the testi-onies of thefollo.ing .itnesses0 %7& Police Inspector %P1Insp!& 'ean 6a2ar"o,77 %(& P1Insp!3arilyn De>uito,7( an" %5& Police Officer %PO& ( Christian Tra-bulo!75Thereafter, the"efense presente" in court the testi-onies of0 %7& the appellant Donal" Vas>ue4 ySan"igan,7@ %(& $ngelina $re2a"o,7< an" %5& $natolia Care"o!7?

The Prosecutions Case

The prosecutions ersion of the eents .as pri-arily "ra.n fro- the testi-onies of P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" PO( Tra-bulo!

P1Insp! 6a2ar"o testifie" that in the -orning of $pril 7, 7++), a confi"entialinfor-ant .ent to their office an" reporte" that a certain Donal" Vas>ue4 .asengage" in illegal "rug actiity! This alias Don suppose"ly clai-e" that he .as ane-ployee of the National Bureau of Inestigation %NBI&! $ccor"ing to the infor-ant,alias Don pro-ise" hi- a goo" co--ission if he %the infor-ant& .oul" present apotential buyer of "rugs! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o relaye" the infor-ation to PoliceSuperinten"ent %P1Supt!& Pepito Do-antay, the co--an"ing officer of their office!

P1Insp! 6a2ar"o .as then instructe" to for- a tea- an" con"uct a possible buy;bustagainst alias Don! She for-e" a tea- on the sa-e "ay, .hich consiste" of herself,PO( Tra-bulo, PO7 $graante, PO7 Pe"rosa, PO7 Sisteno, an" PO7 De la Rosa!P1Insp! 6a2ar"o .as the tea- lea"er! =ith the help of the infor-ant, she .as able toset up a -eeting .ith alias Don! The -eeting .as to be hel" at aroun" +0** p!-!on that "ay at Cin"ys Restaurant locate" in =elco-e Roton"a! She .as onlysuppose" to -eet alias Don that night but she "eci"e" to bring the tea- along forsecurity reasons!7:

$t about +0** p!-! on een "ate, P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" her tea- .ent to the -eetingplace .ith the infor-ant! The -e-bers of her tea- positione" the-selesstrategically insi"e the restaurant! The infor-ant intro"uce" P1Insp! 6a2ar"o to aliasDon as the buyer of shabu! She as8e" alias Don if he .as in"ee" an e-ployee ofthe NBI an" he replie" in the affir-atie! They agree" to close the "eal .herein she

.oul" buy (<* gra-s of shabu forP(<*,***!**! They also agree" to -eet thefollo.ing "ay at Cin"ys Restaurant aroun" 7*0** to 770** p!-!7)

In the eening of $pril (, 7++), P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" her tea- .ent bac8 to Cin"ysRestaurant! $lias Don .as alrea"y .aiting for her outsi"e the establish-ent .henshe arrie"! He as8e" for the -oney an" she replie" that she ha" the -oney .ithher! She brought fie genuine P<**!** bills, .hich .ere inserte" on top of fiebun"les of play -oney to -a8e it appear that she ha" P(<*,***!** .ith her! $ftershe sho.e" the -oney to alias Don, he suggeste" that they go to a -ore secureplace! They agree" for the sale to ta8e place at aroun" 705* to (0** a!-! on $pril 5,7++) in front of alias Dons apart-ent at :?< Val"e4 St!, Sa-paloc, 3anila! Thetea- procee"e" to the =estern Police District %=PD& Station along F!N! $enue forcoor"ination! $fter.ar"s, the tea- hel" their final briefing before they procee"e" tothe target area! They agree" that the pre;arrange" signal .as for P1Insp! 6a2ar"o toscratch her hair, .hich .oul" signify that the "eal ha" been consu--ate" an" therest of the tea- .oul" rush up to the scene! The tea- then traelle" to the a""ressgien by alias Don!7+

=hen the tea- arrie" at the target area aroun" 707< a!-! on $pril 5, 7++), thet.o ehicles they use" .ere par8e" along the corner of the street! P1Insp! 6a2ar"oan" the infor-ant .al8e" to.ar"s the apart-ent of alias Don an" stoo" in front ofthe apart-ent gate! $roun" 70@< a!-!, alias Don ca-e out of the apart-ent .ith a-ale co-panion! $lias Don "e-an"e" to see the -oney, but P1Insp! 6a2ar"o tol"hi- that she .ante" to see the "rugs first! $lias Don gae her the big bro.nenelope he .as carrying an" she chec8e" the contents thereof! Insi"e she foun" aplastic sachet, about 7*) inches in si4e, .hich containe" .hite crystallinesubstance! $fter chec8ing the contents of the enelope, she assu-e" that the sa-e.as in"ee" shabu! She then gae the buy;bust -oney to alias Don an" scratche"her hair to signal the rest of the tea- to rush to the scene! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jan2014/gr_200304_2014.html#fnt1













































i"entifie" herself as a narcotics agent! The t.o suspects trie" to flee but PO(Tra-bulo .as able to stop the- fro- "oing so! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o too8 custo"y of theshabu! =hen she as8e" alias Don if the latter ha" authority to possess or sellshabu, he replie" in the negatie! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o put her initials 9'S69 on thegenuine P<**!** bills belo. the na-e of Benigno $>uino! $fter the arrest of the t.osuspects, the buy;bust tea- brought the- to the police station! The suspects rights.ere rea" to the- an" they .ere subse>uently boo8e"!(*

P1Insp! 6a2ar"o sai" that she foun" out that alias Don .as in fact the appellantDonal" Vas>ue4! She learne" of his na-e .hen he brought out his NBI ID .hile he

.as being boo8e"! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o also learne" that the na-e of the appellantsco-panion .as Reynal"o Siscar, .ho .as also arreste" an" brought to the policestation! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o eplaine" that after she gae the buy;bust -oney to theappellant, the latter han"e" the sa-e to Siscar .ho .as present the entire ti-e thesale .as being consu--ate"! Fpon receiing the buy;bust -oney place" insi"e agreen plastic bag, Siscar loo8e" at the contents thereof an" uttere" 9o8ey na to!9P1Insp! 6a2ar"o -ar8e" the "rug speci-en an" brought the sa-e to the Cri-eaboratory! She .as acco-panie" there by PO( Tra-bulo an" PO7 $graante! Shehan"e" oer the "rug speci-en to PO7 $graante .ho then turne" it oer to P1Insp!Ta"uran, the forensic che-ist on "uty! The police officers preiously .eighe" the"rug speci-en! Thereafter, the personnel at the cri-e laboratory .eighe" thespeci-en again! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" her tea- .aite" for the results of thelaboratory ea-ination!(7

P1Insp! 6a2ar"o further testifie" that the si plastic bags of shabu sei4e" "uring thebuy;bust operation .ere actually containe" in a self;sealing plastic enelope place"insi"e a bro.n enelope! =hen the bro.n enelope .as confiscate" fro- theappellant, she put her initials 9'S69 therein an" signe" it! She notice" that there.ere -ar8ings on the enelope that rea" 9DD;+5;75*5 re $ntonio Roas y Sunga9but she "i" not bother to chec8 out .hat they .ere for or .ho -a"e the-! =henshe interrogate" the appellant about the bro.n enelope, she foun" out that thesa-e .as sub-itte" as ei"ence to the NBI Cri-e aboratory! She also learne" thatthe appellant .or8e" as a aboratory $i"e at the NBI Cri-e aboratory! Shei"entifie" in court the si plastic sachets of "rugs that her tea- recoere", .hichsachets she also initiale" an" signe"! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o also state" that after theappellant .as arreste", PO( Tra-bulo con"ucte" a bo"y search on the t.osuspects! The search yiel"e" 7( -ore plastic sachets of "rugs fro- the appellant!The 7( sachets .ere arie" in si4es an" .ere containe" in a .hite enelope! P1Insp!

6a2ar"o place" her initials an" signature on the enelope! $s to the 7( sachets, thesa-e .ere initiale" by P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" signe" by PO( Tra-bulo! ((

The testi-ony of PO( Tra-bulo corroborate" that of P1Insp! 6a2ar"os! PO(Tra-bulo testifie" that in the -orning of $pril 7, 7++), a confi"ential infor-antreporte" to the- about the illegal "rug actiities of alias Don! P1Supt! Do-antaythen tas8e" P1Insp! 6a2ar"o to for- a buy;bust tea-! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o .as able toset up a -eeting .ith alias Don at Cin"ys Restaurant in =elco-e Roton"a, Jue4onCity! $t that -eeting, PO( Tra-bulo sa. P1Insp! 6a2ar"o tal8 to alias Don! P1Insp!6a2ar"o later tol" the -e-bers of the tea- that she conince" alias Don that she.as a goo" buyer of shabu an" the latter "e-an"e" a secon" -eeting to see the-oney! $fter the initial -eeting, P1Insp! 6a2ar"o briefe" P1Supt! Do-antay about.hat happene"! PO( Tra-bulo state" that on $pril (, 7++), P1Insp! 6a2ar"o .asfurnishe" .ith fie genuine P<**!** bills together .ith the boo"le play -oney!

P1Insp! 6a2ar"o place" her initials in the genuine bills belo. the na-e 9Benigno$>uino, 'r!9 $fter.ar"s, the tea- left the office! =hen they arrie" at Cin"ys

Restaurant past 7*0** p!-!, alias Don .as .aiting outsi"e! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o sho.e"the boo"le -oney to alias Don an" after so-e ti-e, they parte" .ays! P1Insp!6a2ar"o later tol" the tea- that alias Don "eci"e" that the "rug "eal .oul" ta8eplace in front of alias Dons rente" apart-ent on Val"e4 St!, Sa-paloc, 3anila! $fteran hour, the tea- .ent to Val"e4 St! to fa-iliari4e the-seles .ith the area! Theythen procee"e" to the =PD station to coor"inate their operation! Thereafter, P1Insp!6a2ar"o con"ucte" a final briefing .herein PO( Tra-bulo .as "esignate" as thei--e"iate bac8;up arresting officer! The agree" pre;arrange" signal .as for P1Insp!6a2ar"o to scratch her hair to in"icate the consu--ation of the "eal! PO( Tra-bulo.as to signal the sa-e to the other -e-bers of the tea-!(5

The buy;bust tea- .ent to the target area at aroun" 705* to (0** a!-! on $pril 5,7++)! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" the infor-ant .al8e" to.ar"s the "irection of alias Donsapart-ent, .hile PO( Tra-bulo positione" hi-self near a par8e" 2eepney about 7<to (* -eters fro- the apart-ent gate! The rest of the tea- par8e" their ehicles atthe street perpen"icular to Val"e4 St! ater, alias Don .ent out of the gate .ithanother person! PO( Tra-bulo sa. alias Don gesturing to P1Insp! 6a2ar"o as ifas8ing for so-ething but P1Insp! 6a2ar"o gesture" that she .ante" to seeso-ething first! $lias Don han"e" P1Insp! 6a2ar"o a big bro.n enelope, .hich thelatter opene"! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o then han"e" to alias Don a green plastic bagcontaining the buy;bust -oney an" gae the pre;arrange" signal! =hen PO(Tra-bulo sa. this, he i--e"iately su--one" the rest of the tea- an" rushe" tothe suspects! He .as able to recoer the buy;bust -oney fro- alias Dons -aleco-panion! Fpon fris8ing alias Don, PO( Tra-bulo retriee" 7( pieces of plastic

sachets of suspecte" "rugs! The sa-e .ere place" insi"e a .hite enelope that .astuc8e" insi"e alias Dons .aist! PO( Tra-bulo -ar8e" each of the 7( sachets .ithhis initials 9CVT9 an" the "ate! The police officers then infor-e" the suspects oftheir rights an" they procee"e" to the police hea">uarters in 6ort Bonifacio!(@

$s regar"s the bro.n enelope that alias Don han"e" to P1Insp! 6a2ar"o, the latterretaine" possession thereof! The enelope containe" si pieces of plastic bags of.hite crystalline substance! =hen they got bac8 to their office, the tea- reporte"the progress of their operation to P1Supt! Do-antay! The arreste" suspects .ereboo8e" an" the re>uire" "ocu-entations .ere prepare"! $-ong such "ocu-ents.as the Re>uest for aboratory #a-ination of the "rug speci-ens sei4e"! PO(Tra-bulo sai" that he .as the one .ho brought the sai" re>uest to the PNP Cri-eaboratory, along .ith the "rug speci-ens!(<

P1Insp! 3arilyn De>uito, the forensic che-ist, testifie" on the results of herea-ination of the "rug speci-ens sei4e" in this case! She eplaine" that P1Insp!3acario Ta"uran, 'r! initially ea-ine" the "rug speci-ens but the latter .asalrea"y assigne" to another office! The results of the ea-ination of P1Insp!Ta"uran .ere lai" "o.n in Physical Science Report No! D;7*:7;+)! P1Insp! De>uitofirst stu"ie" the "ata containe" in Physical Science Report No! D;7*:7;+) an"retriee" the sa-e fro- their office! She entere" that fact in their logboo8 RD;7:;+)! She then .eighe" the "rug speci-ens an" ea-ine" the .hite crystallinesubstance fro- each of the plastic sachets! She ea-ine" first the speci-ens-ar8e" as 9$;7,9 9$;(,9 9$;5,9 9$;@,9 9$;<9 an" 9$;?!9 P1Insp! De>uitosea-ination reeale" that the .hite crystalline substances .ere positie for-etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e!(? She also ea-ine" the contents of 7( heat;seale" transparent plastic sachets that also containe" crystalline substances! The 7(plastic sachets .ere -ar8e" 9B;79 to 9B;7(!9 The .hite crystalline po."er insi"e

the 7( plastic sachets also teste" positie for -etha-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e!

















P1Insp! De>uitos fin"ings .ere containe" in Physical Science Report No! RD;7:;+)!(:

The prosecution, thereafter, a""uce" the follo.ing ob2ect an" "ocu-entaryei"ence0 %7& photocopies of the fie original P<**!** bills() use" as buy;bust-oney %#hibits $;#& %(& Re>uest for aboratory #a-ination(+ "ate" $pril 5, 7++)%#hibit 6& %5& In itial aboratory Report5* "ate" $pril 5, 7++), stating that thespeci-en sub-itte" for ea-ination teste" positie for -ethyla-pheta-inehy"rochlori"e %#hibit /& %@& Court Or"er57 "ate" Septe-ber (, 7++) %#hibit H&%<& Physical Sciences Report No! D;7*:7;+)5( "ate" $pril 5, 7++) %#hibit I& %?&

Drug speci-ens $;7 to $;? %#hibits ';O& %:& Big bro.n enelope %#hibit P& %)&S-all .hite enelope %#hibit J& %+& Drug speci-ens B;7 to B;7( %#hibits R;CC&%7*& Physical Sciences Report No! RD;7:;+)55 %#hibit DD& %77& 'oint $ffi"ait of$rrest5@ %#hibit ##& %7(& Play -oney %#hibit 66& %75& Boo8ing Sheet an" $rrestReport5< %#hibit //& %7@& Re>uest for 3e"ical #a-ination5? %#hibit HH& %7<&3e"ico egal Slip5: of Donal" Vas>ue4 %#hibit II& an" %7?& 3e"ico egal Slip5) ofReynal"o Siscar %#hibit ''&!

The Defenses Case

$s epecte", the "efense belie" the prosecutions ersion of eents! The appellantsbrief 5+ before the Court of $ppeals proi"es a concise su--ary of the "efensescounter;state-ent of facts! $ccor"ing to the "efense0

Donal" Vas>ue4 .as a regular e-ployee of the NBI, .or8ing as a aboratory $i"e IIat the NBI 6orensics Che-istry Diision! His "uties at the ti-e inclu"e" being asubpoena cler8, receiing che-istry cases as .ell as re>uests fro- "ifferent policeagencies to hae their speci-ens ea-ine" by the che-ist! He also ren"ere" "ayan" night "uties, an" "uring regular office hours an" in the absence of thelaboratory technician, he .oul" .eigh the speci-ens! $s subpoena cler8, he .oul"receie subpoenas fro- the trial courts! =hen there is no che-ist, he .oul" get aSpecial Or"er to testify, or bring the "rug speci-ens, to the courts!

On 7 $pril 7++), Donal" Vas>ue4 too8 his ea-ination in 3anagerial Statisticsbet.een ?0** to +0** ocloc8 p!-! Thereafter, he too8 a 2eepney an" alighte" atStop an" Shop at Juiapo! 6ro- there, he too8 a tricycle to his house, arriing at+0@< ocloc8 that eening, .here he sa. Reynal"o Siscar an" Sonny San Diego, the

latter a confi"ential infor-ant of the narcotics agents!

On 5 $pril 7++), at 70@< ocloc8 in the -orning, Donal"s househol" help, $natoliaCare"o, .ho ha" 2ust arrie" fro- $ntipolo that ti-e, .as eating .hile Donal" .asasleep! She hear" a 8noc8 on the "oor! Reynal"o Siscar opene" the "oor an"thereafter t.o %(& -en entere", po8ing guns at Reynal"o! They .ere follo.e" bythree %5& others! The "oor to Donal"s roo- .as 8ic8e" "o.n an" they entere" hisroo-! Donal", hearing noise, .o8e up to see P!1Insp! 6a2ar"o pointing a gun at h i-!He sa. that there .ere si %?& police-en searching his roo-, pic8ing up .hat theycoul" get! One of the- opene" a cabinet an" got "rug speci-ens in KDonal"sLpossession in relation to his .or8 as a laboratory ai"e! The "rugs ca-e fro- t.o %(&cases an" -ar8e" as DD;+5;75*5 o.ne" by $ntonio Roas, an" DD;+?;<5+( o.ne"by SPO@ #-iliano $nonas! The "rug speci-en containe" in the enelope -ar8e" asDD;+5;75*5 .as inten"e" for presentation on 5 $pril 7++)! $si"e fro- the "rug

speci-ens, the police-en also too8 his 2e.elry, a VHS player, an" his .alletcontaining P(,<5*!**!

$ngelina $re2a"o, Donal"s neighbor, .itnesse" the police-en entering theapart-ent an" apprehen"ing Donal" an" Reynal"o fro- the apart-entterrace!@* %Citations o-itte"!&

The "efense then offere" the follo.ing ei"ence0 %7& NBI Disposition 6or-@7 "ate"$pril 5, 7++) %#hibit 7& %(& S.orn State-ent of I"abel BernabePagulayan@( %#hibit (& %5& Photocopy of the buy;bust -oney@5 %#hibit 5& %@& istof Hearings@@ atten"e" by Donal" Vas>ue4 %#hibit @& %<& $uthori4ationetter@< prepare" by $cting Deputy Director $rturo $! 6igueras "ate" 3arch (:,7++) %#hibit <& an" %?& ist of #i"ence@? ta8en by Donal" Vas>ue4 fro- 7++?;7++) %#hibit ?&!

The Decision of the RTC

On $ugust ?, (**+, the RTC conicte" the appellant of the cri-es charge"! The RTCgae -ore cre"ence to the prosecutions ei"ence gien that the presu-ption ofregularity in the perfor-ance of official "uty on the part of the police officers .asnot oerco-e! The trial court hel" that the appellant "i" not present any ei"encethat .oul" sho. that the police officers in this case .ere i-pelle" by an eil -otieto charge hi- of ery serious cri-es an" falsely testify against hi-! $lso, the trial

court note" that the olu-e of the shabu inole" in this case .as consi"erable,i!e!, (@:!+) gra-s an" @!*5 gra-s for illegal sale an" illegal possession,respectiely! To the -in" of the trial court, such fact helpe" to "ispel the possibilitythat the "rug speci-ens sei4e" .ere -erely plante" by the police officers!6urther-ore, the RTC rule" that the positie testi-onies of the police officersregar"ing the illegal "rug pe""ling actiities of the appellant preaile" oer thelatters bare "enials!

$ssu-ing for the sa8e of argu-ent that the appellant .as -erely fra-e" up by thepolice, the trial court pointe" out that0

KTLhe accuse" shoul" hae reporte" the sai" inci"ent to the proper authorities, oras8e" help fro- his $cting Chief KI"abelL Pagulayan fro- the NBI to testify an"

i"entify in Court the ero copy of the Disposition 6or- .hich she issue" to theaccuse" an" the $ffi"ait "ate" $pril 7:, 7++) %ero copy& eecute" by her or fro-3r! $rturo $! 6igueras, $cting Deputy Director, Technical Serices of the NBI totestify an" i"entify the etter issue" by the sai" $cting Deputy Director in or"er tocorroborate an" strengthen his testi-ony that he .as in"ee" authori4e" to 8eep inhis custo"y the sai" shabu to be presente" or turne" oer to the Court as ei"ence,an" he shoul" hae file" the proper charges against those police officers .ho .ereresponsible for such act! But the accuse" "i" not een bother to "o the sa-e!6urther, the pieces of ei"ence %Disposition 6or-, $ffi"ait of KI"abelL Pagulayanan" etter "ate" 3arch (:, 7++) issue" by $cting Deputy Director& presente" bythe accuse" in Court coul" not be gien .eight an" cre"ence consi"ering that thesai" persons .ere not presente" in Court to i"entify the sai" "ocu-ents an" thatthe prosecution has no opportunity to cross;ea-ine the sa-e, thus, it has noprobatie alue!@:

The trial court, thus, "ecree"0



















































=H#R#6OR#, 2u"g-ent is hereby ren"ere" as follo.s0

7! In Cri-! Case No! +);7?@7:@, f in"ing accuse", DON$D V$SJF#Q yS$NDI/$N 9DON9 guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-e ofViolation of Sec! 7<, $rt! III in Relation to Sec!

( %e&, %f&, %-&, %o&, $rt! I of R!$! No! ?@(< an" hereby sentences hi- tosuffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua an" a fine of P<,***,***!** an"(! In Cri-! Case No! +);7?@7:<, 2u"g-ent is hereby ren"ere" fin"ing theaccuse", DON$D V$SJF#Q y S$NDI/$N 9DON9 guilty beyon"reasonable "oubt of the cri-e of Violation of Sec! 7?, $rt! III in Relation toSec! ( %e;(& $rt! I of R!$! ?@(< as $-en"e" by Batas Pa-bansa Bilang 7:+an" hereby sentences hi- to suffer the penalty of SI %?& 3ONTHS an"ON# %7& D$G to 6OFR %@& G#$RS an" a fine of 6OFR THOFS$ND%P@,***!**& P#SOS!

The sub2ect shabu %(@:!+) gra-s an" @!*5 gra-s, respectiely& are herebyforfeite" in faor of the goern-ent an" the Branch Cler8 of Court is hereby"irecte" to "elier an"1or cause the "eliery of the sai" shabu to the Philippine Drug#nforce-ent $gency %PD#$&, upon the finality of this Decision!@)

The 'u"g-ent of the Court of $ppeals

On appeal,@+ the Court of $ppeals affir-e" the coniction of the appellant! Theappellate court rule" that the prosecution sufficiently proe" the ele-ents of thecri-es of illegal sale an" illegal possession of shabu! The testi-ony of P1Insp!6a2ar"o on the con"uct of the buy;bust operation .as foun" to be clear an"categorical! $s the appellant faile" to a""uce any ei"ence that ten"e" to proe anyill -otie on the part of the police officers to falsely charge the appellant, the Courtof $ppeals hel" that the presu-ption of regularity in the perfor-ance of official"uties on the part of the police officers ha" not been controerte" in this case!

The "ispositie portion of the Court of $ppeals "ecision state"0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the instant appeal is hereby D#NI#D! The$ugust ?, (**+ Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch @7 of the City of 3anila

in Cri-inal Cases No! +);7?@7:@;:<, fin"ing appellant Donal" Vas>ue4 y San"iganguilty beyon" reasonable "oubt for the cri-es of Violation of Section 7< an" Section7?, $rticle III of Republic $ct No! ?@(< is $66IR3#D .ith the 3ODI6IC$TION that inCri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:<, appellant is hereby sentence" to suffer thein"eter-inate penalty of si -onths of arresto -ayor, as -ini-u-, to t.o years,four -onths an" one "ay of prision correccional in its -e"iu- perio", as-ai-u-!<*

The Ruling of the Court

The appellant appeale" his case to this Court to once again i-pugn his coniction ont.o groun"s0 %7& the purporte" illegality of the search an" the ensuing arrest "oneby the police officers an" %(& his suppose" authority to possess the illegal "rugs

sei4e" fro- hi-!<7

He argues that the police officers "i" not hae a search .arrantor a .arrant of arrest at the ti-e he .as arreste"! This occurre" "espite the fact

that the police officers allege"ly ha" a-ple ti-e to secure a .arrant of arrestagainst hi-! Inas-uch as his arrest .as illegal, the appellant aers that theei"ence obtaine" as a result thereof .as ina"-issible in court! $s the corpus "elictiof the cri-e .as ren"ere" ina"-issible, the appellant posits that his guilt .as notproen beyon" reasonable "oubt! $ppellant further insists that he .as able to proethat he .as authori4e" to 8eep the "rug speci-ens in his custo"y, gien that he .asan e-ployee of the NBI 6orensic Che-istry aboratory .ho .as tas8e" .ith the"uty to bring "rug speci-ens in court!

$fter an assi"uous reie. of the ei"ence a""uce" by both parties to this case, .e

resole to "eny this appeal!

$t the outset, the Court rules that the appellant can no longer assail the ali"ity ofhis arrest! =e reiterate" in People ! Ta-pis <( that 9KaLny ob2ection, "efect orirregularity atten"ing an arrest -ust be -a"e before the accuse" enters his plea onarraign-ent! Haing faile" to -oe for the >uashing of the infor-ation againstthe- before their arraign-ent, appellants are no. estoppe" fro- >uestioning thelegality of their arrest! $ny irregularity .as cure" upon their oluntary sub-issionto the trial courts 2uris"iction!9<5 Be that as it -ay, the fact of the -atter is that theappellant .as caught in flagrante "elicto of selling illegal "rugs to an un"ercoerpolice officer in a buy;bust operation! His arrest, thus, falls .ithin the a-bit ofSection <%a&, Rule 775<@ of the Reise" Rules on Cri-inal Proce"ure .hen an arrest-a"e .ithout .arrant is "ee-e" la.ful! Haing establishe" the ali"ity of the.arrantless arrest in this case, the Court hol"s that the .arrantless sei4ure of the

illegal "rugs fro- the appellant is li8e.ise ali"! =e hel" in People !Cabugatan<< that0

This inter"iction against .arrantless searches an" sei4ures, ho.eer, is not absolutean" such .arrantless searches an" sei4ures hae long been "ee-e" per-issible by 2urispru"ence in instances of %7& search of -oing ehicles, %(& sei4ure in plainie., %5& custo-s searches, %@& .aier or consente" searches, %<& stop an" fris8situations %Terry search&, an" search inci"ental to a la.ful arrest! The last inclu"es aali" .arrantless arrest, for, .hile as a rule, an arrest is consi"ere" legiti-ate KifLeffecte" .ith a ali" .arrant of arrest, the Rules of Court recogni4e per-issible.arrantless arrest, to .it0 %7& arrest in flagrante "elicto, %(& arrest effecte" in hotpursuit, an" %5& arrest of escape" prisoners! %Citation o-itte"!&

Thus, the appellant cannot see8 eculpation by ino8ing belate"ly the inali"ity ofhis arrest an" the subse>uent search upon his person!

=e no. rule on the substantie -atters!

To secure a coniction for the cri-e of illegal sale of regulate" or prohibite" "rugs,the follo.ing ele-ents shoul" be satisfactorily proen0 %7& the i"entity of the buyeran" seller, the ob2ect, an" the consi"eration an" %(& the "eliery of the thing sol"an" the pay-ent therefor!<? $s hel" in People ! Chua Tan ee,<: in a prosecution ofillegal sale of "rugs, 9.hat is -aterial is proof that the accuse" pe""le" illicit "rugs,couple" .ith the presentation in court of the corpus "elicti!9 On the other han", theele-ents of illegal possession of "rugs are0 %7& the accuse" is in possession of anite- or ob2ect .hich is i"entifie" to be a prohibite" "rug %(& such possession is notauthori4e" by la. an" %5& the accuse" freely an" consciously possesse" the sai""rug!<)































In the case at bar, the testi-onies of P1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" PO( Tra-bulo establishe"that a buy;bust operation .as legiti-ately carrie" out in the .ee hours of $pril 5,7++) to entrap the appellant! P1Insp! 6a2ar"o, the poseur;buyer, positiely i"entifie"the appellant as the one .ho sol" to her si plastic bags of shabu that .erecontaine" in a big bro.n enelope for the price of P(<*,***!**! She li8e.isei"entifie" the si plastic bags of shabu, .hich containe" the -ar8ings she place"thereon after the sa-e .ere sei4e" fro- the appellant! =hen sub2ecte" tolaboratory ea-ination, the .hite crystalline po."er containe" in the plastic bagsteste" positie for shabu! =e fin" that P1Insp! 6a2ar"os testi-ony on the eentsthat transpire" "uring the con"uct of the buy;bust operation .as "etaile" an"straightfor.ar"! She .as also consistent an" un.aering in her narration een inthe face of the opposing counsels cross;ea-ination!

$part fro- her "escription of the eents that le" to the echange of the "rugspeci-ens sei4e" an" the buy;bust -oney, P1Insp! 6a2ar"o further testifie" as tothe recoery fro- the appellant of another 7( pieces of plastic sachets of shabu!$fter the latter .as arreste", P1Insp! 6a2ar"o state" that PO( Tra-bulo con"ucte" abo"y search on the appellant! This search resulte" to the confiscation of 7( -oreplastic sachets, the contents of .hich also teste" positie for shabu! The testi-onyof P1Insp! 6a2ar"o .as a-ply corroborate" by PO( Tra-bulo, .hose o.n account"oetaile" the for-ers narration of eents! Both police officers also i"entifie" incourt the t.ele plastic sachets of shabu that .ere confiscate" fro- the appellant!

In People ! Ting Fy,<+ the Court eplains that 9cre"ence shall be gien to the

narration of the inci"ent by prosecution .itnesses especially so .hen they are policeofficers .ho are presu-e" to hae perfor-e" their "uties in a regular -anner,unless there be ei"ence to the contrary!9 In the instant case, the appellant faile" toascribe, -uch less satisfactorily proe, any i-proper -otie on the part of theprosecution .itnesses as to .hy they .oul" falsely incri-inate hi-! The appellanthi-self een testifie" that, not only "i" he not hae any -isun"erstan"ing .ithP1Insp! 6a2ar"o an" PO( Tra-bulo prior to his arrest, he in fact "i" not 8no. the-at all!?* In the absence of ei"ence of such ill -otie, none is presu-e" to eist!?7

The recor"s of this case are also silent as to any -easures un"erta8en by theappellant to cri-inally or a"-inistratiely charge the police officers herein for falselyfra-ing hi- up for selling an" possessing illegal "rugs! Such a -oe .oul" not haebeen a "aunting tas8 for the appellant un"er the circu-stances! Being a regulare-ployee of the NBI, the appellant coul" hae easily sought the help of his

i--e"iate superisors an"1or the chief of his office to etricate hi- fro- hispre"ica-ent! Instea", .hat the appellant offere" in ei"ence .ere -erephotocopies of "ocu-ents that suppose"ly sho.e" that he .as authori4e" to 8eep"rug speci-ens in his custo"y! That the original "ocu-ents an" the testi-onies ofthe signatories thereof .ere not at all presente" in court "i" nothing to help theappellants case! To the -in" of the Court, the ei"ence offere" by the appellantfaile" to persua"e a-i" the positie an" categorical testi-onies of the arrestingofficers that the appellant .as caught re";han"e" selling an" possessing aconsi"erable a-ount of prohibite" "rugs on the night of the buy;bust operation!

It is apropos to reiterate here that .here there is no sho.ing that the trial courtoerloo8e" or -isinterprete" so-e -aterial facts or that it graely abuse" its"iscretion, the Court .ill not "isturb the trial courts assess-ent of the facts an" thecre"ibility of the .itnesses since the RTC .as in a better position to assess an".eigh the ei"ence presente" "uring trial! Settle" too is the rule that the factual

fin"ings of the appellate court sustaining those of the trial court are bin"ing on thisCourt, unless there is a clear sho.ing that such fin"ings are tainte" .itharbitrariness, capriciousness or palpable error!?(

On the basis of the foregoing, the Court is conince" that the prosecution .as ableto establish the guilt of the appellant of the cri-es charge"!

The Penalties

$nent the proper i-posable penalties, Section 7< an" Section 7?, $rticle III, inrelation to Section (*%5& of Republic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e" by Republic $ct No!:?<+, state0

S#C! 7<! Sale, $"-inistration, Dispensation, Deliery, Transportation an"Distribution of Regulate" Drugs! ; The penalty of reclusion perpetua to "eath an" afine ranging fro- fie hun"re" thousan" pesos to ten -illion pesos shall be i-pose"upon any person .ho, unless authori4e" by la., shall sell, "ispense, "elier,transport or "istribute any regulate" "rug! Not.ithstan"ing the proisions of Section(* of this $ct to the contrary, if the icti- of the offense is a -inor, or shoul" aregulate" "rug inole" in any offense un"er this Section be the proi-ate cause ofthe "eath of a icti- thereof, the -ai-u- penalty herein proi"e" shall bei-pose"! S#C! 7?! Possession or Fse of Regulate" Drugs! ; The penalty of reclusionperpetua to "eath an" a fine ranging fro- fie hun"re" thousan" pesos to ten

-illion pesos shall be i-pose" upon any person .ho shall possess or use anyregulate" "rug .ithout the correspon"ing license or prescription, sub2ect to theproisions of Section (* hereof!

S#C! (*! $pplication of Penalties, Confiscation an" 6orfeiture of the Procee"s orInstru-ents of the Cri-e! ; The penalties for offenses un"er Sections 5, @, :, ) an"+ of $rticle II an" Sections 7@, 7@;$, 7< an" 7? of $rticle III of this $ct shall beapplie" if the "angerous "rugs inole" is in any of the follo.ing >uantities0

7! @* gra-s or -ore of opiu-

(! @* gra-s or -ore of -orphine

5! (** gra-s or -ore of shabu or -ethyla-pheta-ine hy"rochlori"e

@! @* gra-s or -ore of heroin

<! :<* gra-s or -ore of In"ian he-p or -ari2uana

?! <* gra-s or -ore of -ari2uana resin or -ari2uana resin oil

:! @* gra-s or -ore of cocaine or cocaine hy"rocholori"e or

)! In the case of other "angerous "rugs, the >uantity of .hich is farbeyon" therapeutic re>uire-ents, as "eter-ine" an" pro-ulgate" by the












Dangerous Drugs Boar", after public consultations1hearings con"ucte" forthe purpose!

Other.ise, if the >uantity inole" is less than the foregoing >uantities, the penaltyshall range fro- prision correccional to reclusion perpetua "epen"ing upon the>uantity! %#-phases supplie"!&

In Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:@ inoling the cri-e of illegal sale of regulate""rugs, the appellant .as foun" to hae sol" to the poseur;buyer in this case a totalof (@:!+) gra-s of shabu, .hich a-ount is -ore than the -ini-u- of (** gra-sre>uire" by the la. for the i-position of either reclusion perpetua or, if there beaggraating circu-stances, the "eath penalty!

Pertinently, $rticle ?5?5 of the Reise" Penal Co"e -an"ates that .hen the la.prescribes a penalty co-pose" of t.o in"iisible penalties an" there are neither-itigating nor aggraating circu-stances in the co--ission of the cri-e, the lesserpenalty shall be applie"!1âwphi1 Thus, in this case, consi"ering that no -itigatingor aggraating circu-stances atten"e" the appellants iolation of Section 7<,$rticle III of Republic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e", the Court of $ppeals correctlyaffir-e" the trial courts i-position of reclusion perpetua! The P<,***,***!** finei-pose" by the RTC on the appellant is also in accor" .ith Section 7<, $rticle III ofRepublic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e"!

$s to the charge of illegal possession of regulate" "rugs in Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:<, the Court of $ppeals properly ino8e" our ruling in People ! Tira?@ in"eter-ining the proper i-posable penalty! In"ee", .e hel" in Tira that0

Fn"er Section 7?, $rticle III of Rep! $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e", the i-posablepenalty of possession of a regulate" "rug, less than (** gra-s, in this case, shabu,is prision correccional to reclusion perpetua! Base" on the >uantity of the regulate""rug sub2ect of the offense, the i-posable penalty shall be as follo.s0

JF$NTITG I3POS$B# P#N$TG

ess than one %7& gra- to @+!(< gra-s prision correccional

@+!(? gra-s to +)!<* gra-s prision -ayor

+)!<7 gra-s to 7@:!:< gra-s reclusion te-poral

7@:!:? gra-s to 7++ gra-s reclusion perpetua%#-phases ours!&

/ien that the a""itional 7( plastic sachets of shabu foun" in the possession of theappellant a-ounte" to @!*5 gra-s, the i-posable penalty for the cri-e is prisioncorreccional! $pplying the In"eter-inate Sentence a., there being no aggraatingor -itigating circu-stance in this case, the i-posable penalty on the appellantshoul" be the in"eter-inate sentence of si -onths of arresto -ayor, as -ini-u-,to four years an" t.o -onths of prision correccional, as -ai-u-! The penaltyi-pose" by the Court of $ppeals, thus, falls .ithin the range of the proper

i-posable penalty! In Cri-inal Case No! +);7?@7:<, no fine is i-posable

consi"ering that in Republic $ct No! ?@(<, as a-en"e", a fine can be i-pose" as acon2unctie penalty only if the penalty is reclusion perpetua to "eath!?<

Inci"entally, the Court notes that both parties in this case a"-itte" that theappellant .as a regular e-ployee of the NBI 6orensics Che-istry Diision! Suchfact, ho.eer, cannot be ta8en into consi"eration to increase the penalties in thiscase to the -ai-u-, in accor"ance .ith Section (@ of Republic $ct No! ?@(<, asa-en"e"!?? Such a special aggraating circu-stance, i!e!, one that .hich arisesun"er special con"itions to increase the penalty for the offense to its -ai-u-perio",?: .as not allege" an" charge" in the infor-ations! Thus, the sa-e .as

properly "isregar"e" by the lo.er courts!

$ll tol", the Court fin"s no reason to oerturn the coniction of the appellant!

=H#R#6OR#, the Court of $ppeals Decision "ate" 3ay 57, (*77 in C$;/!R! CR!;H!C!No! *@(*7 is $66IR3#D! No costs!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

#N B$NC

G.R. No. 1+630 $-r&r 11, 2014

SATURNINO C. OCAMPO, Petitioner,

s!)ON. EP)REM S. AAN"O, i' i &p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ;















R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= )ilo'<o, L;, r&' 1, CESAR M. MERIN, i'. i

&p&i; & Appro>i'< Pro;or &'( O==ir8i'8C&r<, ROSULO U.

IERO, i' i &p&i; & I'>;i<&;i'< Pro;or, RAUL M. GON#ALE#, i'

i &p&i; & Sr;&r o= ; "p&r;?'; o= !;i, Respon"ents!

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

G.R. No. 155+

RAN"ALL . EC)ANIS, Petitioner,

s!

)ON. T)ELMA UN%l8ME"INA, i' r &p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ;

R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= M&'il&, r&' 32, )ON. EP)REM S. AAN"O, i' i

&p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ; R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= )ilo'<o, L;,

r&' 1, CESAR M. MERIN, i' i &p&i; & Appro>i'< Pro;or &'(

O==ir8i'8C&r<, ROSULO U. IERO, i' i &p&i; & I'>;i<&;i'<

Pro;or, RAUL M. GON#ALE#, i' i &p&i; & Sr;&r o= ;

"p&r;?'; o= !;i, Respon"ents!

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

G.R. No. 15636

RA$AEL G. A%LOSIS, Petitioner,

s!

)ON. T)ELMA UN%I8ME"INA, i' r &p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ;

R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= M&'il&, r&' 32, )ON. EP)REM S. AAN"O, i' i

&p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ; R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= )ilo'<o, L;,

r&' 1, CESAR M. MERIN, i' i &p&i; & Appro>i'< Pro;or &'(

O==ir8i'8C&r<, ROSULO U. IERO, i' i &p&i; & I'>;i<&;i'<

Pro;or, RAUL M. GON#ALE#, i' i &p&i; & Sr;&r o= ;

"p&r;?'; o= !;i, Respon"ents!

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

G.R. No. 1*0005

ICENTE P. LA"LA", Petitioner,

s!

)ON. T)ELMA UN%I8ME"INA, i' r &p&i; & Pri(i'< !(< o= ;

R<io'&l Tri&l Cor; o= M&'il&, r&' 32, &'( ; PEOPLE O$ T)E

P)ILIPPINES, Respon"ents!

D # C I S I O N

SERENO, CJ.:

On (? $ugust (**?, a -ass grae .as "iscoere" by ele-ents of the @5r" Infantry

Briga"e of the Philippine $r-y at Sitio Sapang Daco, Barangay Eaulisihan,

Inopacan, eyte!7 The -ass grae containe" s8eletal re-ains of in"ii"uals beliee"

to be icti-s of 9Operation Venereal Disease9 %Operation VD& launche" by -e-bers

of the Co--unist Party of the Philippines1Ne. Peoples $r-y1National De-ocratic

6ront of the Philippines %CPP1NP$1ND6P& to purge their ran8s of suspecte" -ilitary

infor-ers!

=hile the "octrine of hierarchy of courts nor-ally preclu"es a "irect inocation of

this Courts 2uris"iction, .e ta8e cogni4ance of these petitions consi"ering that

petitioners hae chosen to ta8e recourse "irectly before us an" that the cases are of

significant national interest!

Petitioners hae raise" seeral issues, but -ost are too insubstantial to re>uire

consi"eration! $ccor"ingly, in the eercise of soun" 2u"icial "iscretion an" econo-y,

this Court .ill pass pri-arily upon the follo.ing0

7! =hether petitioners .ere "enie" "ue process "uring preli-inary

inestigation an" in the issuance of the .arrants of arrest!

(! =hether the -ur"er charges against petitioners shoul" be "is-isse"

un"er the political offense "octrine!

$NT#C#D#NT 6$CTS

These are petitions for certiorari an" prohibition( see8ing the annul-ent of the

or"ers an" resolutions of public respon"ents .ith regar" to the in"ict-ent an"

issuance of .arrants of arrest against petitioners for the cri-e of -ultiple -ur"er!

Police Chief Inspector /eorge ! $l-a"en %P C1Insp! $l-a"en& of the Philippine

National Police %PNP& Regional Office ) an" Staff 'u"ge $"ocate Captain $llan Tiu%$r-y Captain Tiu& of the )th Infantry Diision of the Philippine $r-y sent 7(

un"ate" letters to the Proincial Prosecutor of eyte through $ssistant Proincial

Prosecutor Rosulo F! Viero %Prosecutor Viero&!5 The letters re>ueste" appropriate

legal action on 7( co-plaint;affi"aits attache" there.ith accusing :7 na-e"

-e-bers of the Co--unist Party of the Philippines1Ne. Peoples $r-y1National

De-ocratic 6ront of the Philippines %CPP1NP$1ND6P& of -ur"er, inclu"ing petitioners

herein along .ith seeral other unna-e" -e-bers!

The letters narrate" that on (? $ugust (**?, ele-ents of the @5r" Infantry Briga"e

of the Philippine $r-y "iscoere" a -ass grae site of the CPP1NP$1ND6P at Sitio

Sapang Daco, Barangay Eaulisihan, Inopacan, eyte!@Recoere" fro- the grae site

.ere ?: seerely "eteriorate" s8eletal re-ains beliee" to be icti-s of OperationVD!<














The PNP Scene of the Cri-e Operation %SOCO& Tea- base" in Regional Office ) .as

i--e"iately "ispatche" to the -ass grae site to con"uct cri-e inestigation, an"

to collect, presere an" analy4e the s8eletal re-ains!? $lso, fro- 77;7: Septe-ber

(**?, an inestigation tea- co-pose" of intelligence officers, an" -e"ico;legal an"

DN$ eperts, con"ucte" forensic cri-e analysis an" collecte" fro- allege" relaties

of the icti-s DN$ sa-ples for -atching!:

The Initial Specialist Report) "ate" 7) Septe-ber (**? issue" by the PNP Cri-e

aboratory in Ca-p Cra-e, Jue4on City, .as inconclusie .ith regar" to the

i"entities of the s8eletal re-ains an" een the length of ti-e that they ha" beenburie"! The report reco--en"e" the con"uct of further tests to confir- the

i"entities of the re-ains an" the ti-e . in"o. of "eath!+

Ho.eer, in a Special Report7* "ate" ( October (**?, the Case Secretariat of the

Regional an" National Inter;$gency egal $ction /roup %I$$/& ca-e up .ith the

na-es of ten %7*& possible icti-s after co-parison an" ea-ination base" on

testi-onies of relaties an" .itnesses!77

The 7( co-plaint;affi"aits .ere fro- relaties of the allege" icti-s of Operation

VD! $ll of the- s.ore that their relaties ha" been ab"ucte" or last seen . ith

-e-bers of the CPP1NP$1ND6P an" .ere neer seen again!

They also epresse" belief that their relaties re-ains .ere a-ong those

"iscoere" at the -ass grae site!

$lso attache" to the letters .ere the affi"aits of Qacarias Pie"a",7( eonar"o C!

Tanai", 6loro 3! Tanai", Nu-eriano Beringuel, /lecerio Roluna an" Veronica P!

Tabara! They narrate" that they .ere for-er -e-bers of the

CPP1NP$1ND6P!75 $ccor"ing to the-, Operation VD .as or"ere" in 7+)< by the

CPP1NP$1ND6P Central Co--ittee!7@ $llege"ly, petitioners Saturnino C! Oca-po

%Oca-po&,7< Ran"all B! #chanis %#chanis&,7? Rafael /! Baylosis %Baylosis&,7: an"

Vicente P! a"la" %a"la"&7) .ere then -e-bers of the Central Co--ittee!

$ccor"ing to these for-er -e-bers, four sub;groups .ere for-e" to i-ple-ent

Operation VD, na-ely, %7& the Intel /roup responsible for gathering infor-ation on

suspecte" -ilitary spies an" ciilians .ho .oul" not support the -oe-ent %(& the

$rresting /roup charge" .ith their arrests %5& the Inestigation /roup .hich .oul"

sub2ect those arreste" to >uestioning an" %@& the #ecution /roup or the

9cleaners9 of those confir-e" to be -ilitary spies an" ciilians .ho .oul" not

support the -oe-ent!7+

6ro- 7+)< to 7++(, at least 7** people ha" been ab"ucte", hog;tie", torture" an"

eecute" by -e-bers of the CPP1NP$1ND6(* pursuant to Operation VD!(7

On the basis of the 7( letters an" their attach-ents, Prosecutor Viero issue" a

subpoena re>uiring, a-ong others, petitioners to sub-it their counter;affi"aits an"

those of their .itnesses!(( Petitioner Oca-po sub-itte" his counter;

affi"ait!(5 Petitioners #chanis(@ an" Baylosis(< "i" not file counter;affi"aits because

they .ere allege"ly not sere" the copy of the co-plaint an" the attache"

"ocu-ents or ei"ence! Counsel of petitioner a"la" -a"e a for-al entry of

appearance on ) Dece-ber (**? "uring the preli-inary inestigation!(? Ho.eer,

petitioner a"la" "i" not file a counter;affi"ait because he .as allege"ly not sere"

a subpoena!(:

In a Resolution() "ate" 7? 6ebruary (**:, Prosecutor Viero reco--en"e" the filing

of an Infor-ation for 7< counts of -ultiple -ur"er against <@ na-e" -e-bers ofthe CPP1NP$1ND6P, inclu"ing petitioners herein, for the "eath of the follo.ing0 7&

'uanita $iola, (& Concepcion $ragon, 5& /regorio #ras, @& Teo"oro Recones, 'r!, <&

Restituto #2oc, ?& Rolan"o Vas>ue4, :& 'unior 3ilyapis, )& Crispin Dal-acio, +&

Qacarias Casil, 7*& Pablo Daniel, 77& Ro-eo Tayabas, 7(& Do-ingo Napoles, 75&

Ciriaco Daniel, 7@& Crispin Pra"o, an" 7<& #reberto Pra"o!(+

Prosecutor Viero also reco--en"e" that Qacarias Pie"a", eonar"o Tanai",

Nu-eriano Beringuel an" /lecerio Roluna be "roppe" as respon"ents an" utili4e" as

state .itnesses, as their testi-onies .ere ital to the success of the

prosecution!5* The Resolution .as silent .ith regar" to Veronica Tabara!

The Infor-ation .as file" before the Regional Trial Court %RTC& Hilongos, eyte,Branch 7) %RTC Hilongos, eyte& presi"e" by 'u"ge #phre- S! $ban"o %'u"ge

$ban"o& on () 6ebruary (**:, an" "oc8ete" as Cri-inal Case No! H;

7<)7!57 Petitioner Oca-po file" an # Parte 3otion to Set Case for Clarificatory

Hearing "ate" < 3arch (**: prior to receiing a copy of the Resolution

reco--en"ing the filing of the Infor-ation!5(

On ? 3arch (**:, 'u"ge $ban"o issue" an Or"er fin"ing probable cause 9in the

co--ission by all -entione" accuse" of the cri-e charge"!955 He or"ere" the

issuance of .arrants of arrest against the- .ith no reco--en"e" bail for their

te-porary liberty!5@

On 7? 3arch (**:, petitioner Oca-po file" before us this special ciil action for

certiorari an" prohibition un"er Rule ?< of the Rules of Court an" "oc8ete" as /!R!

No! 7:?)5* see8ing the annul-ent of the ? 3arch (**: Or"er of 'u"ge $ban"o an"

the 7? 6ebruary (**: Resolution of Prosecutor Viero!5< The petition praye" for the

uncon"itional release of petitioner Oca-po fro- PNP custo"y, as .ell as the

issuance of a te-porary restraining or"er1 .rit of preli-inary in2unction to restrain

the con"uct of further procee"ings "uring the pen"ency of the petition!5?

Petitioner Oca-po argue" that a case for rebellion against hi- an" @@ others

%inclu"ing petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis5: an" a"la"5)& "oc8ete" as Cri-inal

Case No! *?;+@@ .as then pen"ing before the RTC 3a8ati, Branch 7<* %RTC

3a8ati&!5+ Putting for.ar" the political offense "octrine, petitioner Oca-po argues

that co--on cri-es, such as -ur"er in this case, are alrea"y absorbe" by the




















































































cri-e of rebellion .hen co--itte" as a necessary -eans, in connection .ith an" in

furtherance of rebellion!@*

=e re>uire"@7 the Office of the Solicitor /eneral %OS/& to co--ent on the petition

an" the prayer for the issuance of a te-porary restraining or"er1 .rit of preli-inary

in2unction, an" set@( the case for oral argu-ents on 5* 3arch (**:! The OS/ file"

its Co--ent on (: 3arch (**:!@5

The follo.ing .ere the legal issues "iscusse" by the parties "uring the oral

argu-ents0

7! =hether the present petition for certiorari an" prohibition is the proper

re-e"y of petitioner Oca-po

(! $ssu-ing it is the proper re-e"y, .hether he .as "enie" "ue process

"uring preli-inary inestigation an" in the issuance of the .arrant of

arrest

5! =hether the -ur"er charges against hi- are alrea"y inclu"e" in the

rebellion charge against hi- in the RTC!@@

$fter.ar"s, the parties .ere or"ere" to sub-it their -e-oran"a .ithin 7*

"ays!@< On 5 $pril (**:, the Court or"ere" the proisional release of petitioner

Oca-po un"er a P7**,*** cash bon"!@?

$cting on the obseration of the Court "uring the oral argu-ents that the single

Infor-ation file" before the RTC Hilongos, eyte .as "efectie for charging 7<

counts of -ur"er, the prosecution file" a 3otion to $"-it $-en"e" Infor-ation an"

Ne. Infor-ations on 77 $pril (**:!@: In an Or"er "ate" (: 'uly (**:, 'u"ge

$ban"o hel" in abeyance the resolution thereof an" effectiely suspen"e" the

procee"ings "uring the pen"ency of /!R! No! 7:?)5* before this Court!@)

=hile the procee"ings .ere suspen"e", petitioner #chanis .as arreste" on ()

'anuary (**) by irtue of the .arrant of arrest issue" by 'u"ge $ban"o on ? 3arch(**:!@+ On 7 6ebruary (**), petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis file" a 3otion for

'u"icial Reinestigation1 Deter-ination of Probable Cause .ith Prayer to Dis-iss the

Case Outright an" $lternatie Prayer to Recall1 Suspen" Serice of =arrant!<*

On 5* $pril (**), 'u"ge $ban"o issue" an Or"er "enying the -otion!<7 Petitioners

#chanis an" Baylosis file" a 3otion for Reconsi"eration<( "ate" 5* 3ay (**), but

before being able to rule thereon, 'u"ge $ban"o issue" an Or"er "ate" 7( 'une

(**) trans-itting the recor"s of Cri-inal Case No! H;7<)7 to the Office of the Cler8

of Court, RTC 3anila!<5 The Or"er .as issue" in co-pliance .ith the Resolution

"ate" (5 $pril (**) of this Court granting the re>uest of then Secretary of 'ustice

Raul /on4ales to transfer the enue of the case!

The case .as re;raffle" to RTC 3anila, Branch 5( %RTC 3anila& presi"e" by 'u"ge

Thel-a Bunyi;3e"ina %'u"ge 3e"ina& an" re;"oc8ete" as Cri-inal Case No! *);

(?(7?5!<@ Petitioner #chanis .as transferre" to the PNP Custo"ial Center in Ca-p

Cra-e, Jue4on City! On 7( $ugust (**), petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis file" their

Supple-ental $rgu-ents to 3otion for Reconsi"eration!<<

In an Or"er<? "ate" (: October (**), 'u"ge 3e"ina suspen"e" the procee"ings of

the case pen"ing the resolution of /!R! No! 7:?)5* by this Court!

On 7) Dece-ber (**), petitioner a"la" file" .ith the RTC 3anila a 3otion to

Juash an"1or Dis-iss!<:

On (5 Dece-ber (**), petitioner #chanis file" before us a special ciil action for

certiorari an" prohibition un"er Rule ?< of the Rules of Court see8ing the annul-ent

of the 5* $pril (**) Or"er of 'u"ge $ban"o an" the (: October (**) Or"er of

'u"ge 3e"ina!<) The petition, "oc8ete" as /!R! No! 7)<<):, praye" for the

uncon"itional an" i--e"iate release of petitioner #chanis, as .ell as the issuance of

a te-porary restraining or"er1.rit of preli-inary in2unction to restrain his further

incarceration!<+

On < 'anuary (**+, petitioner Baylosis file" before us a special ciil action for

certiorari an" prohibition un"er Rule ?< of the Rules of Court also see8ing the

annul-ent of the 5* $pril (**) Or"er of 'u"ge $ban"o an" the (: October (**)

Or"er of 'u"ge 3e"ina!?* The petition, "oc8ete" as /!R! No! 7)<?5?, praye" for the

issuance of a te-porary restraining or"er1 .rit of preli-inary in2unction to restrain

the i-ple-entation of the .arrant of arrest against petitioner Baylosis!?7

The Court consoli"ate" /!R! Nos! 7)<<): an" 7)<?5? on 7( 'anuary (**+!?(

On 5 3arch (**+, the Court or"ere" the further consoli"ation of these t.o cases

.ith /!R! No! 7:?)5*!?5 =e re>uire"?@ the OS/ to co--ent on the prayer for

petitioner #chaniss i--e"iate release, to .hich the OS/ "i" not interpose any

ob2ection on these con"itions0 that the te-porary release shall only be for the

purpose of his atten"ance an" participation in the for-al peace negotiations

bet.een the /oern-ent of the Republic of the Philippines %/RP& an" the

CPP1NP$1ND6P, set to begin in $ugust (**+ an" that his te-porary release shall

not ecee" si %?& -onths!?< The latter con"ition .as later -o"ifie", such that his

te-porary liberty shall continue for the "uration of his actual participation in the

peace negotiations!??

On 77 $ugust (**+, the Court or"ere" the proisional release of petitioner #chanis

un"er a P7**,*** cash bon", for the purpose of his participation in the for-al peace

negotiations!?:








































































3ean.hile, the Depart-ent of 'ustice %DO'& file" its Opposition?) to petitioner

a"la"s -otion to >uash before the RTC 3anila! The trial court con"ucte" a hearing

on the -otion on 75 6ebruary (**+!?+

On ? 3ay (**+, 'u"ge 3e"ina issue" an Or"er:* "enying the -otion to >uash! The

-otion for reconsi"eration file" by petitioner a"la" .as also "enie" on (: $ugust

(**+!:7

On + Noe-ber (**+, petitioner a"la" file" before us a special ciil action for

certiorari un"er Rule ?< of the Rules of Court see8ing the annul-ent of the ? 3ay

(**+ an" (: $ugust (**+ Or"ers of 'u"ge 3e"ina!:( The petition .as "oc8ete" as

/!R! No! 7+***<!

On 77 'anuary (*7*, .e or"ere" the consoli"ation of /!R! No! 7+***< .ith /!R!

Nos! 7:?)5*, 7)<<): an" 7)<?5?!:5 =e also re>uire" the OS/ to file its co--ent

thereon! The OS/ sub-itte" its Co--ent:@ on : 3ay (*7*!

On (: 'uly (*7*, .e li8e.ise re>uire" the OS/ to file its Co--ent in /!R! Nos!

7)<?5? an" 7)<<):!:< These Co--ents .ere file" by the OS/ on 75 Dece-ber

(*7*:? an" on (7 'anuary (*77,:: respectiely! Petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis file"

their Consoli"ate" Reply:) on : 'une (*77!

On ( 3ay (*77, petitioner a"la" file" an Frgent 3otion to 6i Bail!:+ On (7 'uly

(*77, petitioner Baylosis file" $ 3otion to $llo. Petitioner to Post Bail!)* The OS/

interpose" no ob2ection to the grant of a P7**,*** cash bail to the- consi"ering

that they .ere consultants of the ND6P negotiating tea-, .hich .as then hol"ing

negotiations .ith the /RP peace panel for the signing of a peace accor"!)7

On 7: 'anuary (*7(, .e grante" the -otions of petitioners a"la" an" Baylosis an"

fie" their bail in the a-ount ofP7**,***, sub2ect to the con"ition that their

te-porary release shall be li-ite" to the perio" of their actual participation in the

peace negotiations!)(

Petitioner a"la" file" his Reply)5 to the OS/ Co--ent on 7) 'anuary (*75!

OFR RFIN/

Petitioners were accorded due

process during preliminary

investigation and in the issuance of

the warrants of arrest.

$! Preli-inary Inestigation

$ preli-inary inestigation is 9not a casual affair!9 )@ It is con"ucte" to protect the

innocent fro- the e-barrass-ent, epense an" aniety of a public trial!)< =hile the

right to hae a preli-inary inestigation before trial is statutory rather than

constitutional, it is a substantie right an" a co-ponent of "ue process in the

a"-inistration of cri-inal 2ustice!)?

In the contet of a preli-inary inestigation, the right to "ue process of la. entails

the opportunity to be hear"!): It seres to accor" an opportunity for the

presentation of the respon"ents si"e .ith regar" to the accusation! $fter.ar"s, the

inestigating officer shall "eci"e .hether the allegations an" "efenses lea" to areasonable belief that a cri-e has been co--itte", an" that it .as the respon"ent

.ho co--itte" it! Other.ise, the inestigating officer is boun" to "is-iss the

co-plaint!

9The essence of "ue process is reasonable opportunity to be hear" an" sub-it

ei"ence in support of oneAs "efense!9)) =hat is proscribe" is lac8 of opportunity to

be hear"!)+ Thus, one .ho has been affor"e" a chance to present ones o.n si"e of

the story cannot clai- "enial of "ue process!+*

Petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis allege that they "i" not receie a copy of the

co-plaint an" the attache" "ocu-ents or ei"ence!+7 Petitioner a"la" clai-s that

he .as not sere" a subpoena "ue to the false a""ress in"icate" in the 7( un"ate"letters of P C1Insp! $l-a"en an" $r-y Captain Tiu to Prosecutor

Viero!+( 6urther-ore, een though his counsels file" their for-al entry of

appearance before the Office of the Prosecutor, petitioner a"la" .as still not sent a

subpoena through his counsels a""resses!+5 Thus, they .ere "eprie" of the right

to file counter;affi"aits!

Petitioner Oca-po clai-s that Prosecutor Viero, in collusion .ith P C1Insp!

$l-a"en an" $r-y Captain Tiu, surreptitiously inserte" the Supple-ental $ffi"ait

of Qacarias Pie"a" in the recor"s of the case .ithout furnishing petitioner Oca-po a

copy!+@ The original affi"ait of Qacarias Pie"a" "ate" 7@ Septe-ber (**? state"

that a -eeting presi"e" by petitioner Oca-po .as hel" in 7+)@, .hen the launching

of Operation VD .as agree" upon!+<

Petitioner Oca-po refute" this clai- in hisCounter;affi"ait "ate" (( Dece-ber (**? stating that he .as in -ilitary custo"y

fro- October 7+:? until his escape in 3ay 7+)<! +? Thereafter, the Supple-ental

$ffi"ait of Qacarias Pie"a" "ate" 7( 'anuary (**: a"-itte" that he -a"e a

-ista8e in his original affi"ait, an" that the -eeting actually too8 place in 'une

7+)<!+: Petitioner Oca-po argues that he .as "enie" the opportunity to reply to the

Supple-ental $ffi"ait by not being furnishe" a copy thereof!

Petitioner Oca-po also clai-s that he .as "enie" the right to file a -otion for

reconsi"eration or to appeal the Resolution of Prosecutor Viero, because the latter

"eliberately "elaye" the serice of the Resolution by 7+ "ays, effectiely "enying

petitioner Oca-po his right to "ue process!+)














































































$s to the clai- of petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis, .e >uote the pertinent portion

of Prosecutor Vieros Resolution, .hich states0

In connection .ith the foregoing an" pursuant to the Reise" Rules of Cri-inal

Proce"ureK,L the respon"ents .ere issue" an" sere" .ith Subpoena at their last

8no.n a""ress for the- to sub-it their counter;affi"aits an" that of their

.itnesses!

3a2ority of the respon"ents "i" not sub-it their counter;affi"aits because they

coul" no longer be foun" in their last 8no.n a""ress, per return of the subpoenas!

On the other han", Saturnino Oca-po Satur, 6i"es i-, 3aureen Pale2aro an"

Ruben 3anata" sub-itte" their Counter;$ffi"aits! Ho.eer, Vicente a"la" an"

'as-in 'erusale- faile" to sub-it the re>uire" Counter $ffi"aits in spite entry of

appearance by their respectie counsels!++

Section 5%"&, Rule 77( of the Rules of Court, allo.s Prosecutor Viero to resole the

co-plaint base" on the ei"ence before hi- if a respon"ent coul" not be

subpoenae"! $s long as efforts to reach a respon"ent .ere -a"e, an" he .as gien

an opportunity to present counterailing ei"ence, the preli-inary inestigation

re-ains ali"!7**The rule .as put in place in or"er to foil un"erhan"e" atte-pts of a

respon"ent to "elay the prosecution of offenses!7*7

In this case, the Resolution state" that efforts .ere un"erta8en to sere subpoenas

on the na-e" respon"ents at their last 8no.n a""resses! This is sufficient for "ue

process! It .as only because a -a2ority of the- coul" no longer be foun" at their

last 8no.n a""resses that they .ere not sere" copies of the co-plaint an" the

attache" "ocu-ents or ei"ence!

Petitioner a"la" clai-s that his subpoena .as sent to the noneistent a""ress 9<5

Sct! Rallos St!, JC,97*( .hich ha" neer been his a""ress at any ti-e!7*5 In

connection .ith this clai-, .e ta8e note of the fact that the subpoena to 6i"es i-,

petitioner a"la"s .ife,7*@ .as sent to the sa-e a""ress, an" that she .as a-ong

those -entione" in the Resolution as haing ti-ely sub-itte" their counter;

affi"aits!

Despite suppose"ly neer receiing a subpoena, petitioner a"la"s counsel file" a

for-al entry of appearance on ) Dece-ber (**?!7*< Prosecutor Viero ha" a reason

to beliee that petitioner a"la" ha" receie" the subpoena an" accor"ingly

instructe" his counsel to prepare his "efense!

Petitioner a"la", through his counsel, ha" eery opportunity to secure copies of the

co-plaint after his counsels for-al entry of appearance an", thereafter, to

participate fully in the preli-inary inestigation! Instea", he refuse" to participate!

=e hae preiously cautione" that 9litigants represente" by counsel shoul" not

epect that all they nee" to "o is sit bac8, rela an" a.ait the outco-e of their

case!97*? Haing opte" to re-ain passie "uring the preli-inary inestigation,

petitioner a"la" an" his counsel cannot no. clai- a "enial of "ue process, since

their failure to file a counter;affi"ait .as of their o.n "oing!

Neither "o .e fin" any -erit in petitioner Oca-pos allegation of collusion to

surreptitiously insert the Supple-ental $ffi"ait of Qacarias Pie"a" in the recor"s!

There .as nothing surreptitious about the Supple-ental $ffi"ait since it clearly

allu"es to an earlier affi"ait an" a"-its the -ista8e co--itte" regar"ing the "ate

of the allege" -eeting! The "ate of the eecution of the Supple-ental $ffi"ait .as

also clearly state"! Thus, it .as clear that it .as eecute" after petitioner Oca-poha" sub-itte" his counter;affi"ait! Shoul" the case go to trial, that . ill proi"e

petitioner Oca-po .ith the opportunity to >uestion the eecution of Qacarias

Pie"a"s Supple-ental $ffi"ait!

Neither can .e uphol" petitioner Oca-pos contention that he .as "enie" the right

to be hear"! 6or hi- to clai- that he .as "enie" "ue process by not being furnishe"

a copy of the Supple-ental $ffi"ait of Qacarias Pie"a" .oul" i-ply that the entire

case of the prosecution reste" on the Supple-ental $ffi"ait! The OS/ has asserte"

that the in"ict-ent of petitioner Oca-po .as base" on the collectie affi"aits of

seeral other .itnesses7*: attesting to the allegation that he .as a -e-ber of the

CPP1NP$1ND6P Central Co--ittee, .hich ha" or"ere" the launch of Operation VD!

$s to his clai- that he .as "enie" the right to file a -otion for reconsi"eration or to

appeal the Resolution of Prosecutor Viero "ue to the 7+;"ay "elay in the serice of

the Resolution, it -ust be pointe" out that the perio" for filing a -otion for

reconsi"eration or an appeal to the Secretary of 'ustice is rec8one" fro- the "ate of

receipt of the resolution of the prosecutor, not fro- the "ate of the resolution! This

is clear fro- Section 5 of the (*** National Prosecution Serice Rule on $ppeal0

Sec! 5! Perio" to appeal! The appeal shall be ta8en .ithin fifteen %7<& "ays fro-

receipt of the resolution, or of the "enial of the -otion for reconsi"eration1

reinestigation if one has been file" .ithin fifteen %7<& "ays fro- receipt of the

assaile" resolution! Only one -otion for reconsi"eration shall be allo.e"! %#-phasis

supplie"&

Thus, .hen petitioner Oca-po receie" the Resolution of Prosecutor Viero on 7(

3arch (**:,7*) the for-er ha" until (: 3arch (**: .ithin .hich to file either a

-otion for reconsi"eration before the latter or an appeal before the Secretary of

'ustice! Instea", petitioner Oca-po chose to file the instant petition for certiorari

"irectly before this Court on 7? 3arch (**:!

B! Issuance of the =arrants of $rrest

$rticle III, Section ( of the Constitution proi"es that 9no search .arrant or .arrant

of arrest shall issue ecept upon probable cause to be "eter-ine" personally by the


























2u"ge after ea-ination un"er oath or affir-ation of the co-plainant an" the

.itnesses he -ay pro"uce!9

Petitioner Oca-po alleges that 'u"ge $ban"o "i" not co-ply .ith the re>uire-ents

of the Constitution in fin"ing the eistence of probable cause for the issuance of

.arrants of arrest against petitioners!7*+

Probable cause for the issuance of a .arrant of arrest has been "efine" as 9such

facts an" circu-stances .hich .oul" lea" a reasonably "iscreet an" pru"ent -an to

beliee that an offense has been co--itte" by the person sought to be

arreste"!977* $lthough the Constitution proi"es that probable cause shall be

"eter-ine" by the 2u"ge after an ea-ination un"er oath or an affir-ation of the

co-plainant an" the .itnesses, .e hae rule" that a hearing is not necessary for

the "eter-ination thereof!777 In fact, the 2u"ges personal ea-ination of the

co-plainant an" the .itnesses is not -an"atory an" in"ispensable for "eter-ining

the aptness of issuing a .arrant of arrest!77(

It is enough that the 2u"ge personally ealuates the prosecutors report an"

supporting "ocu-ents sho.ing the eistence of probable cause for the in"ict-ent

an", on the basis thereof, issue a .arrant of arrest or if, on the basis of his

ealuation, he fin"s no probable cause, to "isregar" the prosecutorAs resolution an"

re>uire the sub-ission of a""itional affi"aits of .itnesses to ai" hi- in "eter-iningits eistence!775

Petitioners #chanis an" Baylosis clai- that, ha" 'u"ge $ban"o painsta8ingly

ea-ine" the recor"s sub-itte" by Prosecutor Viero, the 2u"ge .oul" hae

ineitably "is-isse" the charge against the-!77@ $""itionally, petitioner Oca-po

alleges that 'u"ge $ban"o "i" not point out facts an" e i"ence in the recor" that

.ere use" as bases for his fin"ing of probable cause to issue a .arrant of arrest!77<

The "eter-ination of probable cause for the issuance of .arrants of arrest against

petitioners is a""resse" to the soun" "iscretion of 'u"ge $ban"o as the trial

2u"ge!77? 6urther eluci"ating on the .i"e latitu"e gien to trial 2u"ges in the

issuance of .arrants of arrest, this Court state" in Sarigu-ba !San"iganbayan 77: as follo.s0

! The trial courtAs eercise of its 2u"icial "iscretion shoul" not, as a general rule,

be interfere" .ith in the absence of grae abuse of "iscretion! In"ee", certiorari .ill

not lie to cure errors in the trial courtAs appreciation of the ei"ence of the parties,

the conclusion of facts it reache" base" on the sai" fin"ings, as .ell as the

conclusions of la.! !

=hether or not there is probable cause for the issuance of .arrants for the arrest of

the accuse" is a >uestion of fact base" on the allegations in the Infor-ations, the

Resolution of the Inestigating Prosecutor, inclu"ing other "ocu-ents an"1or

ei"ence appen"e" to the Infor-ation!

Here, the allegations of petitioners point to factual -atters in"icate" in the affi"aits

of the co-plainants an" .itnesses as bases for the contention that there .as no

probable cause for petitioners in"ict-ent for -ultiple -ur"er or for the issuance of

.arrants for their arrest! $s state" aboe, the trial 2u"ges appreciation of the

ei"ence an" conclusion of facts base" thereon are not interfere" .ith in the

absence of grae abuse of "iscretion! $gain, 9he sufficiently co-plies .ith the

re>uire-ent of personal "eter-ination if he reie.s the KILnfor-ation an" the

"ocu-ents attache" thereto, an" on the basis thereof for-s a belief that the

accuse" is probably guilty of the cri-e .ith .hich he is being charge"!977)

'u"ge $ban"os reie. of the Infor-ation an" the supporting "ocu-ents is sho.n

by the follo.ing portion of the 2u"ges ? 3arch (**: Or"er0

On the ealuation of the Resolution an" its Infor-ation as sub-itte" an" file" by

the Proincial Prosecution of eyte Proince supporte" by the follo.ing "ocu-ents0

$ffi"aits of Co-plainants, S.orn State-ents of =itnesses an" other pertinent

"ocu-ents issue" by the Regional Cri-e aboratory Office, PNP, Region VIII an"

Ca-p Cra-e, Jue4on City, pictures of the grae site an" s8eletal re-ains, this court

has the fin"ings KsicL of probable cause in the co--ission by all -entione" accuse"

of the cri-e charge"!77+

$t botto-, issues inoling the fin"ing of probable cause for an in"ict-ent an"issuance of a .arrant of arrest, as petitioners are "oubtless a.are, are pri-arily

>uestions of fact that are nor-ally not .ithin the purie. of a petition for

certiorari, 7(* such as the petitions file" in the instant consoli"ate" cases!

The political offense doctrine is not a

ground to dismiss the charge against

petitioners prior to a determination

by the trial court that the murders

were committed in furtherance of

rebellion.

Fn"er the political offense "octrine, 9co--on cri-es, perpetrate" in furtherance ofa political offense, are "ieste" of their character as 9co--on9 offenses an" assu-e

the political co-pleion of the -ain cri-e of .hich they are -ere ingre"ients, an",

conse>uently, cannot be punishe" separately fro- the principal offense, or

co-plee" .ith the sa-e, to 2ustify the i-position of a graer penalty!97(7

$ny or"inary act assu-es a "ifferent nature by being absorbe" in the cri-e of

rebellion!7(( Thus, .hen a 8illing is co--itte" in furtherance of rebellion, the 8illing

is not ho-ici"e or -ur"er! Rather, the 8illing assu-es the political co-pleion of

rebellion as its -ere ingre"ient an" -ust be prosecute" an" punishe" as rebellion

alone!




































Ho.eer, this is not to say that public prosecutors are oblige" to consistently charge

respon"ents .ith si-ple rebellion instea" of co--on cri-es! No one "isputes the

.ell;entrenche" principle in cri-inal proce"ure that the institution of cri-inal

charges, inclu"ing .ho- an" .hat to charge, is a""resse" to the soun" "iscretion

of the public prosecutor!7(5

But .hen the political offense "octrine is asserte" as a "efense in the trial court, it

beco-es crucial for the court to "eter-ine .hether the act of 8illing .as "one in

furtherance of a political en", an" for the political -otie of the act to be

conclusiely "e-onstrate"!7(@

Petitioners aer that the recor"s sho. that the allege" -ur"ers .ere co--itte" in

furtherance of the CPP1NP$1ND6P rebellion, an" that the political -otiation behin"

the allege" -ur"ers can be clearly seen fro- the charge against the allege" top

lea"ers of the CPP1NP$1ND6P as co;conspirators!

=e ha" alrea"y rule" that the bur"en of "e-onstrating political -otiation -ust be

"ischarge" by the "efense, since -otie is a state of -in" .hich only the accuse"

8no.s!7(< The proof sho.ing political -otiation is a""uce" "uring trial .here the

accuse" is assure" an opportunity to present ei"ence supporting his "efense! It is

not for this Court to "eter-ine this factual -atter in the instant petitions!

$s hel" in the case of Office of the Proincial Prosecutor of Qa-boanga Del Norte !

C$,7(? if "uring trial, petitioners are able to sho. that the allege" -ur"ers .ere

in"ee" co--itte" in furtherance of rebellion, Section 7@, Rule 77* of the Rules of

Court proi"es the re-e"y, to .it0

S#CTION 7@! $-en"-ent or substitution! $ co-plaint or infor-ation -ay be

a-en"e", in for- or in substance, .ithout leae of court, at any ti-e before the

accuse" enters his plea! $fter the plea an" "uring the trial, a for-al a-en"-ent

-ay only be -a"e .ith leae of court an" .hen it can be "one .ithout causing

pre2u"ice to the rights of the accuse"!

Ho.eer, any a-en"-ent before plea, .hich "o.ngra"es the nature of the offense

charge" in or eclu"es any accuse" fro- the co-plaint or infor-ation, can be -a"e

only upon -otion by the prosecutor, .ith notice to the offen"e" party an" .ith

leae of court! The court shall state its reasons in resoling the -otion an" copies of

its or"er shall be furnishe" all parties, especially the offen"e" party! %n&

If it appears at any ti-e before 2u"g-ent that a -ista8e has been -a"e in charging

the proper offense, the court shall "is-iss the original co-plaint or infor-ation

upon the filing of a ne. one charging the proper offense in accor"ance .ith Section

7+, Rule 77+, proi"e" the accuse" shall not be place" in "ouble 2eopar"y! The

court -ay re>uire the .itnesses to gie bail for their appearance at the trial!

%#-phasis supplie"&

Thus, if it is sho.n that the proper charge against petitioners shoul" hae been

si-ple rebellion, the trial court shall "is-iss the -ur"er charges upon the filing of

the Infor-ation for si-ple rebellion, as long as petitioners .oul" not be place" in

"ouble 2eopar"y!

Section :, Rule 77: of the Rules of Court, states0

S#C! :! 6or-er coniction or ac>uittal "ouble 2eopar"y! =hen an accuse" has

been conicte" or ac>uitte", or the case against hi- "is-isse" or other.ise

ter-inate" .ithout his epress consent by a court of co-petent 2uris"iction, upon a

ali" co-plaint or infor-ation or other for-al charge sufficient in for- an"

substance to sustain a coniction an" after the accuse" ha" plea"e" to the charge,

the coniction or ac>uittal of the accuse" or the "is-issal of the case shall be a bar

to another prosecution for the offense charge", or for any atte-pt to co--it the

sa-e or frustration thereof, or for any offense .hich necessarily inclu"es or is

necessarily inclu"e" in the offense charge" in the for-er co-plaint or infor-ation!

Base" on the aboe proision, "ouble 2eopar"y only applies .hen0 %7& a first

2eopar"y attache" %(& it has been ali"ly ter-inate" an" %5& a secon" 2eopar"y is

for the sa-e offense as in the first!7(:

$ first 2eopar"y attaches only after the accuse" has been ac>uitte" or conicte", or

the case has been "is-isse" or other.ise ter-inate" .ithout his epress consent,

by a co-petent court in a ali" in"ict-ent for .hich the accuse" has entere" a ali"

plea "uring arraign-ent!7()

To recall, on 7( 3ay (**?, an Infor-ation for the cri-e of rebellion, as "efine" an"

penali4e" un"er $rticle 75@ in relation to $rticle 75< of the Reise" Penal Co"e,

"oc8ete" as Cri-inal Case No! *?;+@@ .as file" before the RTC 3a8ati against

petitioners an" seeral others!7(+

Ho.eer, petitioners .ere neer arraigne" in Cri-inal Case No! *?;+@@!1awp+

+i1 #en before the in"ict-ent for rebellion .as file" before the RTC 3a8ati,

petitioners Oca-po, #chanis an" a"la" ha" alrea"y file" a petition before this

Court to see8 the nullification of the Or"ers of the DO' "enying their -otion for the

inhibition of the -e-bers of the prosecution panel "ue to lac8 of i-partiality an"

in"epen"ence!75* =hen the in"ict-ent .as file", petitioners Oca-po, #chanis an"

a"la" file" supple-ental petitions to en2oin the prosecution of Cri-inal Case No!

*?;+@@!757=e eentually or"ere" the "is-issal of the rebellion case! It is clear then

that a first 2eopar"y neer ha" a chance to attach!

Petitioner Oca-po shall re-ain on proisional liberty un"er the P7**,*** cash bon"

poste" before the Office of the Cler8 of Court! He shall re-ain on proisional liberty

until the ter-ination of the procee"ings before the RTC 3anila!1âwphi1
























The OS/ has gien its confor-ity to the proisional liberty of petitioners #chanis,

Baylosis an" a"la" in ie. of the ongoing peace negotiations! Their proisional

release fro- "etention un"er the cash bon" of P7**,*** each shall continue un"er

the con"ition that their te-porary release shall be li-ite" to the perio" of their

actual participation as CPP;ND6 consultants in the peace negotiations .ith the

goern-ent or until the ter-ination of the procee"ings before the RTC 3anila,

.hicheer is sooner! It shall be the "uty of the goern-ent to infor- this Court the

-o-ent that peace negotiations are conclu"e"!

=H#R#6OR#, the instant consoli"ate" petitions are DIS3ISS#D! The RTC of 3anila,Branch 5(, is hereby ORD#R#D to procee" .ith "ispatch .ith the hearing of

Cri-inal Case No! *);(?(7?5! Petitioner Saturnino C! Oca-po shall re-ain on

te-porary liberty un"er the sa-e bail grante" by this Court until the ter-ination of

the procee"ings before the RTC 3anila! Petitioners Ran"all B! #chanis, Rafael /!

Baylosis an" Vicente P! a"la" shall re-ain on te-porary liberty un"er the sa-e bail

grante" by this Court until their actual participation as CPP;ND6 consultants in the

peace negotiations .ith the goern-ent are conclu"e" or ter-inate", or until the

ter-ination of the procee"ings before the RTC 3anila, .hicheer is sooner!

SO ORD#R#D!Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

3anila

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 202122 !&'&r 15, 2014


s!

ERNAE PARE!A CRU#, $ccuse";$ppellant!

D # C I S I O N

LEOANR"O8"E CASTRO, J.:

The accuse";appellant Bernabe Pare2a y Cru4 %Pare2a& is appealing the 'anuary 7+,

(*7( Decision7 of the Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR!;H!C! No! *5:+@, .hich

affir-e" in toto the coniction for Rape an" $cts of asciiousness -ete" out by

Branch 775, Regional Trial Court %RTC& of Pasay City in Cri-inal Case Nos! *@;7<<?;

C63 an" *@;7<<:;C63!(

On 3ay <, (**@, Pare2a .as charge" .ith t.o counts of Rape an" one $tte-pte"

Rape! The Infor-ations for the three charges rea" as follo.s0

I! 6or the t.o counts of Rape0







Cri-inal Case No! *@;7< < ?;C63

That on or about an" so-eti-e in the -onth of 6ebruary, (**@, in Pasay City, 3etro

3anila, Philippines an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;

na-e" accuse", Bernabe Pare2a y Cru4, being the co--on la. spouse of the -inor

icti-s -other, through force, threats an" inti-i"ation, "i" then an" there .illfully,

unla.fully an" feloniously co--it an act of seual assault upon the person of

K$$$5L, a -inor 75 years of age, by then an" there -ashing her breast an"

inserting his finger insi"e her agina against her .ill!@

Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<:;C63

That on or about an" so-eti-e in the -onth of Dece-ber, (**5, in Pasay City,

3etro 3anila, Philippines an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the

aboe;na-e" accuse", Bernabe Pare2a y Cru4, being the stepfather of K$$$L, a

-inor 75 years of age, through force, threats an" inti-i"ation, "i" then an" there

.illfully, unla.fully an" feloniously hae carnal 8no.le"ge of sai" -inor against her

.ill!<

II! 6or the charge of $tte-pte" Rape0

Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<);C63

That on or about the (:th "ay of 3arch, (**@, in Pasay City, 3etro 3anila,

Philippines an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e"

accuse", B#RN$B# P$R#'$ G CRFQ, being the co--on la. spouse of -inor icti-s

-other by -eans of force, threats an" inti-i"ation, "i" then an" there .illfully,

unla.fully an" feloniously co--ence the co--ission of the cri-e of Rape against

the person of -inor, K$$$L, a75 years ol" -inor by then an" there cra.ling to.ar"s

her "irection .here she .as sleeping, putting off her s8irt, but "i" not perfor- all

the acts of eecution .hich .oul" hae pro"uceK"L the cri-e of rape for the reason

other than his o.n spontaneous "esistance, that is the ti-ely arrial of -inor

icti-s -other .ho confronte" the accuse", an" .hich acts of chil" abuse "ebase",

"egra"e" an" "e-eane" the intrinsic .orth an" "ignity of sai" -inor co-plainant

as a hu-an being!?

On 'une 7:, (**@, Pare2a, "uring his arraign-ent, plea"e" not guilty to the charges

file" against hi-!: $fter the co-pletion of the pre;trial conference on Septe-ber 7?,

(**@,) trial on the -erits ensue"!

The antece"ents of this case, as narrate" by the Court of $ppeals, are as follo.s0

$$$ .as thirteen %75& years of age .hen the allege" acts of lasciiousness an"

seual abuse too8 place on three %5& "ifferent "ates, particularly Kin Dece-ber

(**5L, 6ebruary (**@, an" 3arch (:, (**@!

$$$s parents separate" .hen she .as Konly eight years ol"+L! $t the ti-e of the

co--ission of the afore-entione" cri-es, $$$ .as liing .ith her -other an" .ith

herein accuse";appellant Bernabe Pare2a .ho, by then, .as cohabiting .ith her

-other, together .ith three %5& of their chil"ren, age" t.ele %7(&, eleen %77& an"

nine %+&, in , Pasay City!

The first inci"ent too8 place KiLn Dece-ber (**5 Kthe Dece-ber (**5 inci"entL!

$$$s -other .as not in the house an" .as .ith her relaties in aguna! Ta8ing

a"antage of the situation, KPare2aL, .hile $$$ .as asleep, place" hi-self on top of

KherL! Then, KPare2aL, .ho .as alrea"y na8e", begun to un"ress $$$! KPare2aL thenstarte" to suc8 the breasts of K$$$L! Not satisfie", KPare2aL li8e.ise inserte" his

penis into $$$s anus! Because of the ecruciating pain that she felt, $$$

i--e"iately stoo" up an" rushe" outsi"e of their house!

Despite such trau-atic eperience, $$$ neer tol" anyone about the KDece-ber

(**5L inci"ent for fear that KPare2aL -ight 8ill her! KPare2aL threatene" to 8ill $$$ in

the eent that she .oul" epose the inci"ent to anyone!

$$$ further narrate" that the KDece-ber (**5L inci"ent ha" happene" -ore than

once! $ccor"ing to $$$, in 6ebruary (**@ Kthe 6ebruary (**@ inci"entL, she ha"

again been -oleste" by KPare2aL! Fn"er the sa-e circu-stances as the KDece-ber

(**5 inci"entL, .ith her -other not aroun" .hile she an" her half;siblings .ereasleep, KPare2aL again lai" on top of her an" starte" to suc8 her breasts! But this

ti-e, KPare2aL caresse" KherL an" hel" her agina an" inserte" his finger KiLn it!

=ith regar" to the last inci"ent, on 3arch (:, (**@ Kthe 3arch (**@ inci"entL, it

.as $$$s -other .ho sa. KPare2aL in the act of lifting the s8irt of her "aughter

$$$ .hile the latter .as asleep! Outrage", $$$s -other i--e"iately brought $$$

to the barangay officers to report the sai" inci"ent! $$$ then narrate" to the

barangay officials that she ha" been seually abuse" by KPare2aL -any ti-es

!

Subse>uently, $$$, together .ith her -other, procee"e" to the Chil" Protection Fnit

of the Philippine /eneral Hospital for a -e"ical an" genital ea-ination! On 3arch(+, (**@, Dr! Tan issue" Proisional 3e"ico;egal Report Nu-ber (**@;*5;**+7!

Her -e"ico;legal report state" the follo.ing conclusion0

Hy-en0 Tanner Stage 5, hy-enal re-nant fro- <;: ocloc8 area, Type of hy-en0

Crescentic

/enital fin"ings sho. Clear #i"ence of Blunt 6orce or Penetrating Trau-a!

$fter the results of the -e"ico;legal report confir-e" that $$$ .as in"ee" rape",$$$s -other then file" a co-plaint for rape before the Pasay City Police Station!



















To eculpate hi-self fro- liability, KPare2aL offere" both "enial an" ill -otie of $$$

against hi- as his "efense! He "enie" raping K$$$L but a"-itte" that he 8ne. her

as she is the "aughter of his lie;in partner an" that they all stay in the sa-e

house!

Contrary to $$$s allegations, KPare2aL aerre" that it .oul" hae been i-possible

that the allege" inci"ents happene"! To 2ustify the sa-e, KPare2aL "escribe" the

layout of their house an" argue" that there .as no .ay that the allege" seual

abuses coul" hae happene"!

$ccor"ing to KPare2aL, the house .as -a"e of .oo", only about four %@& -eters

.i"e by ten %7*& -eters, an" .as so s-all that they all hae to sit to be able to fit

insi"e the house! 6urther, the icinity .here their house is locate" .as thic8ly

populate" .ith houses constructe" si"e by si"e! $llege"ly, $$$ also ha" no choice

but to sleep besi"e her siblings!

$ll ta8en into account, KPare2aL asseerate" that it .as har" to i-agine ho. he

coul" possibly still go about .ith his plan .ithout $$$s siblings nor their neighbors

noticing the sa-e!

Verily, KPare2aL .as a"a-ant an" clai-e" innocence as to the i-putations hurle"

against hi- by $$$! He conten"e" that $$$ file" these charges against hi- only as

an act of reenge because $$$ .as -a" at Khi-L for being the reason behin" her

parents separation!7*

Ruling of the RTC

On 'anuary 7?, (**+, the RTC ac>uitte" Pare2a fro- the charge of atte-pte" rape

but conicte" hi- of the cri-es of rape an" acts of lasciiousness in the Dece-ber

(**5 an" 6ebruary (**@ inci"ents, respectiely! The "ispositie portion of the

Decision77 rea"s as follo.s0

=H#R#6OR#, the herein accuse" Bernabe Pare2a y Cru4 is hereby ac>uitte" fro-the charge of atte-pte" rape in Cri-! Case No! *@;7<<), for .ant of ei"ence!

In Cri-! Case No! *@;7<<?, the sai" accuse" is CONVICT#D .ith $cts of

asciiousness an" he is -ete" out the penalty of i-prison-ent, ranging fro- (

years, @ -onths an" 7 "ay as -ini-u- to @ years an" ( -onths of prision

KcorreccionalL as -ai-u-!

In Cri-! Case No! *@;7<<:, the sai" accuse" is CONVICT#D as charge" .ith rape,

an" he is -ete" the penalty of reclusion perpetua!

The accuse" shall be cre"ite" in full for the perio" of his preentie i-prison-ent!

The accuse" is or"ere" to in"e-nify the offen"e" party K$$$L, the su-

of P<*,***!**, .ithout subsi"iary i-prison-ent, in case of insolency!7(

The RTC, in conicting Pare2a of the cri-e of Rape an" $cts of asciiousness, gae

-ore .eight to the prosecutions ei"ence as against Pare2as baseless "enial an"

i-putation of ill -otie! Ho.eer, "ue to the failure of the prosecution to present

$$$s -other to testify about .hat she ha" .itnesse" in 3arch (**@, the RTC ha"

to ac>uit Pare2a of the cri-e of $tte-pte" Rape in the 3arch (**@ inci"ent for lac8

of ei"ence! The RTC coul" not conict Pare2a on the basis of $$$s testi-ony for

being hearsay ei"ence as she ha" no personal 8no.le"ge of .hat happene" on3arch (:, (**@ because she .as sleeping at that ti-e!

Ruling of the Court of $ppeals

=anting to reerse his t.o conictions, Pare2a appeale"75 to the Court of $ppeals,

.hich on 'anuary 7+, (*7(, affir-e" in toto the 2u"g-ent of the RTC in Cri-inal

Case Nos! *@;7<<? an" *@;7<<:, to .it0

=H#R#6OR#, in ie. of the foregoing pre-ises, the instant appeal is hereby

D#NI#D an", conse>uently, DIS3ISS#D! The appeale" Decisions ren"ere" by

Branch 775 of the Regional Trial Court of the National Capital 'u"icial Region in

Pasay City on 'anuary 7?, (**+ in Cri-inal Cases Nos! *@;7<<? to *@;7<<: are

hereby $66IR3#D in toto!7@

Issues

$ggriee", Pare2a eleate" his case to this Court7< an" posite" before us the

follo.ing errors as he "i" before the Court of $ppeals0

I

TH# TRI$ COFRT S#RIOFSG #RR#D IN CONVICTIN/ KP$R#'$L O6 TH# CRI3#S

CH$R/#D NOT=ITHST$NDIN/ TH$T HIS /FIT H$S NOT B##N PROV#N B#GONDR#$SON$B# DOFBT!

II

TH# TRI$ COFRT /R$V#G #RR#D IN CONVICTIN/ KP$R#'$L B$S#D SO#G ON

TH# PROS#CFTION =ITN#SS T#STI3ONG!7?

In his Supple-ental Brief 7: Pare2a a""e" the follo.ing argu-ent0

The priate co-plainants actuations after the inci"ent negate the possibility that

she .as rape"!7)























Pare2as -ain bone of contention is the reliance of the lo.er courts on the testi-ony

of $$$ in conicting hi- for rape an" acts of lasciiousness! Si-ply put, Pare2a is

attac8ing the cre"ibility of $$$ for being inconsistent! 3oreoer, he clai-e", $$$

acte" as if nothing happene" after the allege" seual abuse!

Ruling of this Court

This Court fin"s no reason to reerse Pare2as coniction!

Core Issue0 Cre"ibility of $$$

Pare2a clai-s that $$$s testi-ony cannot be the lone basis of his coniction as it

.as ri""le" .ith inconsistencies!7+

=e fin" such argu-ent untenable!

=hen the issue of cre"ibility of .itnesses is presente" before this Court, .e follo.

certain gui"elines that hae oerti-e been establishe" in 2urispru"ence! In People !

Sanche4,(* .e enu-erate" the- as follo.s0

6irst, the Court gies the highest respect to the RTCs ealuation of the testi-ony of the .itnesses, consi"ering its uni>ue position in "irectly obsering the "e-eanor of

a .itness on the stan"! 6ro- its antage point, the trial court is in the best position

to "eter-ine the truthfulness of .itnesses!

Secon", absent any substantial reason .hich .oul" 2ustify the reersal of the RTCs

assess-ents an" conclusions, the reie.ing court is generally boun" by the lo.er

courts fin"ings, particularly .hen no significant facts an" circu-stances, affecting

the outco-e of the case, are sho.n to hae been oerloo8e" or "isregar"e"!

$n" thir", the rule is een -ore stringently applie" if the C$ concurre" .ith the

RTC! %Citations o-itte"!&

The recogni4e" rule in this 2uris"iction is that the 9assess-ent of the cre"ibility of

.itnesses is a "o-ain best left to the trial court 2u"ge because of his uni>ue

opportunity to obsere their "eport-ent an" "e-eanor on the .itness stan" a

antage point "enie" appellate courts;an" .hen his fin"ings hae been affir-e" by

the Court of $ppeals, these are generally bin"ing an" conclusie upon this

Court!9(7 =hile there are recogni4e" eceptions to the rule, this Court has foun" no

substantial reason to oerturn the i"entical conclusions of the trial an" appellate

courts on the -atter of $$$s cre"ibility!

Besi"es, inaccuracies an" inconsistencies in a rape icti-s testi-ony are generally

epecte"!(( $s this Court state" in People ! Salu"o(50

Rape is a painful eperience .hich is oftenti-es not re-e-bere" in "etail! 6or such

an offense is not analogous to a persons achiee-ent or acco-plish-ent as to be

.orth recalling or reliing rather, it is so-ething .hich causes "eep psychological

.oun"s an" casts a stig-a upon the icti-, scarring her psyche for life an" .hich

her conscious an" subconscious -in" .oul" opt to forget! Thus, a rape icti-

cannot be epecte" to -echanically 8eep an" then gie an accurate account of the

trau-atic an" horrifying eperience she ha" un"ergone! %Citation o-itte"!&

Since hu-an -e-ory is fic8le an" prone to the stresses of e-otions, accuracy in a

testi-onial account has neer been use" as a stan"ar" in testing the cre"ibility of a.itness!(@ The inconsistencies -entione" by Pare2a are triial an" non;conse>uential

-atters that -erely cause" $$$ confusion .hen she .as being >uestione"! The

inconsistency regar"ing the year of the Dece-ber inci"ent is not een a -atter

pertaining to $$$s or"eal!(< The "ate an" t i-e of the co--ission of the cri-e of

rape beco-es i-portant only .hen it creates serious "oubt as to the co--ission of

the rape itself or the sufficiency of the ei"ence for purposes of coniction! In other

.or"s, the 9"ate of the co--ission of the rape beco-es releant only .hen the

accuracy an" truthfulness of the co-plainants narration practically hinge on the

"ate of the co--ission of the cri-e!9(? 3oreoer, the "ate of the co--ission of the

rape is not an essential ele-ent of the cri-e!(:

In this connection, Pare2a repeate"ly ino8es our ruling in People !a"rillo,() i-plying that our rulings therein are applicable to his case! Ho.eer, the

factual circu-stances in a"rillo are pro-inently -issing in Pare2as case! In

particular, the -ain factor for a"rillos ac>uittal in that case .as because his

constitutional right to be infor-e" of the nature an" cause of the accusation against

hi- .as iolate" .hen the Infor-ation against hi- only state" that the cri-e .as

co--itte" 9on or about the year 7++(!9 =e sai"0

The peculiar "esignation of ti-e in the Infor-ation clearly iolates Sec! 77, Rule

77*, of the Rules Court .hich re>uires that the ti-e of the co--ission of the

offense -ust be allege" as near to the actual "ate as the infor-ation or co-plaint

.ill per-it! 3ore i-portantly, it runs afoul of the constitutionally protecte" right of

the accuse" to be infor-e" of the nature an" cause of the accusation against hi-!The Infor-ation is not sufficiently eplicit an" certain as to ti-e to infor- accuse";

appellant of the "ate on .hich the cri-inal act is allege" to hae been co--itte"!

The phrase 9on or about the year 7++(9 enco-passes not only the t.ele %7(&

-onths of 7++( but inclu"es the years prior an" subse>uent to 7++(, e!g!, 7++7

an" 7++5, for .hich accuse";appellant has to irtually account for his .hereabouts!

Hence, the failure of the prosecution to allege .ith particularity the "ate of the

co--ission of the offense an", .orse, its failure to proe "uring the trial the "ate of

the co--ission of the offense as allege" in the Infor-ation, "eprie" accuse";

appellant of his right to intelligently prepare for his "efense an" conincingly refute

the charges against hi-! $t -ost, accuse";appellant coul" only establish his place

of resi"ence in the year in"icate" in the Infor-ation an" not for the particular ti-e

he suppose"ly co--itte" the rape!

























In"ee", the failure of the prosecution to proe its allegation in the Infor-ation that

accuse";appellant rape" co-plainant in 7++( -anifestly sho.s that the "ate of the

co--ission of the offense as allege" .as base" -erely on speculation an"

con2ecture, an" a coniction anchore" -ainly thereon cannot satisfy the >uantu- of

ei"ence re>uire" for a pronounce-ent of guilt, that is, proof beyon" reasonable

"oubt that the cri-e .as co--itte" on the "ate an" place in"icate" in the

Infor-ation!(+ %Citation o-itte"!&

In this case, although the "ates of the Dece-ber (**5 an" 6ebruary (**@ inci"ents

.ere not specifie", the perio" of t i-e Pare2a ha" to account for .as fairly short,

unli8e 9on or about the year 7++(!9 3oreoer, a"rillo .as able to proe that he ha"

only -oe" in the house .here the rape suppose"ly happene", in 7++5, therefore

negating the allegation that he rape" the icti- in that house in 7++(!5*

=hile it -ay be true that the inconsistencies in the testi-ony of the icti- in

a"rillo contribute" to his eentual ac>uittal, this Court sai" that they alone .ere

not enough to reerse a"rillos coniction, i40

3oreoer, there are "iscernible "efects in the co-plaining .itness testi-ony that

-ilitates heaily against its being accor"e" the full cre"it it .as gien by the trial

court! Consi"ere" in"epen"ently, the "efects -ight not suffice to oerturn the trial

courts 2u"g-ent of coniction, but assesse" an" .eighe" in its totality, an" in

relation to the testi-onies of other .itnesses, as logic an" fairness "ictate, they

eert a po.erful co-pulsion to.ar"s reersal of the assaile" 2u"g-ent!57 %#-phasis

supplie"!&

It is .orthy to note that a"rillo also offere" -ore than 2ust a -ere "enial of the

cri-e charge" against hi- to eculpate hi- fro- liability! He also ha" an alibi,

.hich, together .ith the other ei"ence, pro"uce" reasonable "oubt that he

co--itte" the cri-e as charge"! In contrast, Pare2a -erely "enie" the accusations

against hi- an" een i-pute" ill -otie on $$$!

$s regar"s Pare2as concern about $$$s lone testi-ony being the basis of his

coniction, this Court has hel"0

6urther-ore, settle" is the rule that the testi-ony of a single .itness -ay be

sufficient to pro"uce a coniction, if the sa-e appears to be trust.orthy an"

reliable! If cre"ible an" conincing, that alone .oul" be sufficient to conict the

accuse"! No la. or rule re>uires the corroboration of the testi-ony of a single

.itness in a rape case!5( %Citations o-itte"!&

I-probability of seual abuse

in their s-all house an" in the

presence of $$$s sleeping siblings

Pare2a argues that it .as i-probable for hi- to hae seually abuse" $$$,

consi"ering that their house .as so s-all that they ha" to sleep besi"e each other,

that in fact, .hen the allege" inci"ents happene", $$$ .as sleeping besi"e her

younger siblings, .ho .oul" hae notice" if anything unusual .as happening!55

This Court is not conince"! Pare2as liing con"itions coul" hae preente" hi-

fro- acting out on his beastly "esires, but they "i" not! This Court has obsere"

that -any of the rape cases appeale" to us .ere not al.ays co--itte" in seclusion!

ust is no respecter of ti-e or place,5@ an" rape "efies constraints of ti-e an"

space! In People ! Sangil, Sr!,5<

.e epoun"e" on such occurrence in this .ise0

In People ! Ignacio, .e too8 2u"icial notice of the interesting fact that a-ong poor

couples .ith big fa-ilies liing in s-all >uarters, copulation "oes not see- to be a

proble- "espite the presence of other persons aroun" the-! Consi"ering the

cra-pe" space an" -eager roo- for priacy, couples perhaps hae gotten use" to

>uic8 an" less "isturbing -o"es of seual congresses .hich elu"e the attention of

fa-ily -e-bers other.ise, un"er the circu-stances, it .oul" be al-ost i-possible

to copulate .ith the- aroun" een .hen asleep! It is also not i-possible nor

incre"ible for the fa-ily -e-bers to be in "eep slu-ber an" not be a.a8ene" .hile

the seual assault is being co--itte"! One -ay also suppose that gro.ing chil"ren

sleep -ore soun"ly than gro.n;ups an" are not easily a.a8ene" by a"ult eertions

an" suspirations in the night! There is no -erit in appellants contention that therecan be no rape in a roo- .here other people are present! There is no rule that rape

can be co--itte" only in seclusion! =e hae repeate"ly "eclare" that 9lust is no

respecter of ti-e an" place,9 an" rape can be co--itte" in een the unli8eliest of

places! %Citations o-itte"!&

De-eanor of $$$

as a rape icti-

Pare2a asseerates that $$$s "e-eanor an" con"uct belie her clai- that she .as

rape"! He sai" that 9the or"inary 6ilipina K.oul" hae su--one"L eery ounce of

her strength an" courage to th.art any atte-pt to bes-irch her honor an" ble-ish

her purity!9 Pare2a pointe" out that they lie" in a thic8ly populate" area such thatany co--otion insi"e their house .oul" hae been easily hear" by the neighbors,

thus, giing $$$ the perfect opportunity to see8 their help!5? 3oreoer, Pare2a sai",

$$$s "elay in reporting the inci"ents to her -other or the authorities negates the

possibility that he in"ee" co--itte" the cri-es! $$$s belate" confession, he

clai-e", 9cannot be "is-isse" as triial as it puts into serious "oubt her

cre"ibility!95:

$ person accuse" of a serious cri-e such as rape .ill ten" to escape liability by

shifting the bla-e on the icti- for failing to -anifest resistance to seual abuse!

Ho.eer, this Court has recogni4e" the fact that no clear;cut behaior can be

epecte" of a person being rape" or has been rape"! It is a settle" rule that failure

of the icti- to shout or see8 help "o not negate rape! #en lac8 of resistance .illnot i-ply that the icti- has consente" to the seual act, especially .hen that























person .as inti-i"ate" into sub-ission by the accuse"! In cases .here the rape is

co--itte" by a relatie such as a father, stepfather, uncle, or co--on la. spouse,

-oral influence or ascen"ancy ta8es the place of iolence!5) In this case, $$$s lac8

of resistance .as brought about by her fear that Pare2a .oul" -a8e goo" on his

threat to 8ill her if she eer spo8e of the inci"ent!

$$$s con"uct, i!e!, acting li8e nothing happene", after being seually abuse" by

Pare2a is also not enough to "iscre"it her! Victi-s of a cri-e as heinous as rape,

cannot be epecte" to act . ithin reason or in accor"ance .ith societys

epectations! It is unreasonable to "e-an" a stan"ar" rational reaction to anirrational eperience, especially fro- a young icti-! One cannot be epecte" to act

as usual in an unfa-iliar situation as it is i-possible to pre"ict the .or8ings of a

hu-an -in" place" un"er e-otional stress! 3oreoer, it is .rong to say that there

is a stan"ar" reaction or behaior a-ong icti-s of the cri-e of rape since each of

the- ha" to cope .ith "ifferent circu-stances!5+

i8e.ise, $$$s "elay in reporting the inci"ents to her -other or the proper

authorities is insignificant an" "oes not affect the eracity of her charges! It shoul"

be re-e-bere" that Pare2a threatene" to 8ill her if she tol" anyone of the inci"ents!

In People ! Ogarte,@* .e eplaine" .hy a rape icti-s "eferral in reporting the

cri-e "oes not e>uate to falsification of the accusation, to . it0

The failure of co-plainant to "isclose her "efile-ent .ithout loss of ti-e to persons

close to her or to report the -atter to the authorities "oes not perforce .arrant the

conclusion that she .as not seually -oleste" an" that her charges against the

accuse" are all baseless, untrue an" fabricate"! Delay in prosecuting the offense is

not an in"ication of a fabricate" charge! 3any icti-s of rape neer co-plain or file

cri-inal charges against the rapists! They prefer to bear the igno-iny an" pain,

rather than reeal their sha-e to the .orl" or ris8 the offen"ers -a8ing goo" their

threats to 8ill or hurt their icti-s! %Citation o-itte"!&

3e"ical ea-ination

not in"ispensable

Pare2a aers that the 3e"ico;egal Report in"icating that there is ei"ence of blunt

force or penetrating trau-a upon ea-ination of $$$s hy-en, 9cannot be gien

any significance, as it faile" to in"icate ho. an" .hen the sai" signs of physical

trau-a .ere inflicte"!9 6urther-ore, Pare2a sai", the fin"ings that $$$s hy-en

sustaine" trau-a cannot be utili4e" as ei"ence against hi- as the allege" seual

abuse that occurre" in Dece-ber, .as not by penetration of the agina!@7

This Court has ti-e an" again hel" that an accuse" can be conicte" of rape on the

basis of the sole testi-ony of the icti-! In People ! Colora"o,@( .e sai"0

K$L -e"ical certificate is not necessary to proe the co--ission of rape, as een a

-e"ical ea-ination of the icti- is not in"ispensable in a prosecution for rape!

#pert testi-ony is -erely corroboratie in character an" not essential to

coniction! !

Therefore, the absence of testi-ony or -e"ical certificate on the state of $$$s anus

at the ti-e she .as ea-ine" is of no conse>uence! On the contrary, the -e"ical

ea-ination actually bolsters $$$s clai- of being rape" by Pare2a on -ore than

one occasion, an" not 2ust by anal penetration! Ho.eer, as the prosecution faile"

to capitali4e on such ei"ence an" proe the inci"ence of carnal 8no.le"ge, Pare2a

cannot be conicte" of rape un"er paragraph 7 of $rticle (??;$ of the Reise" Penal

Co"e!

In People ! Pere4,@5 this Court aptly hel"0

This Court has hel" ti-e an" again that testi-onies of rape icti-s .ho are young

an" i--ature "esere full cre"ence, consi"ering that no young .o-an, especially

of ten"er age, .oul" concoct a story of "efloration, allo. an ea-ination of her

priate parts, an" thereafter perert herself by being sub2ect to a public trial, if she

.as not -otiate" solely by the "esire to obtain 2ustice for the .rong co--itte"

against her! Gouth an" i--aturity are generally ba"ges of truth! It is highly

i-probable that a girl of ten"er years, one not yet epose" to the .ays of the

.orl", .oul" i-pute to any -an a cri-e so serious as rape if .hat she clai-s is not

true! %Citations o-itte"!&

Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<:;C630

The Dece-ber (**5 Inci"ent

In Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<:;C63 or the Dece-ber (**5 inci"ent, Pare2a .as

charge" an" conicte" of the cri-e of rape by seual assault! The enact-ent of

Republic $ct No! )5<5 or the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:, reolutioni4e" the concept of

rape .ith the recognition of seual iolence on 9se;relate"9 orifices other than a

.o-ans organ is inclu"e" in the cri-e of rape an" the cri-es epansion to coer

gen"er;free rape! 9The transfor-ation -ainly consiste" of the reclassification of

rape as a cri-e against persons an" the intro"uction of rape by seual assault as

"ifferentiate" fro- the tra"itional rape through carnal 8no.le"ge or rape through

seual intercourse!9@@Republic $ct No! )5<5 a-en"e" $rticle 55<, the proision on

rape in the Reise" Penal Co"e an" incorporate" therein $rticle (??;$ .hich rea"s0

$rticle (??;$! Rape, =hen an" Ho. Co--itte"! Rape is co--itte"

7& By a -an .ho shall hae carnal 8no.le"ge of a .o-an un"er any of the

follo.ing circu-stances0

a& Through force, threat or inti-i"ation


















b& =hen the offen"e" party is "eprie" of reason or is other.ise unconscious,

c& By -eans of frau"ulent -achination or grae abuse of authority

"& =hen the offen"e" party is un"er t.ele %7(& years of age or is "e-ente", een

though none of the circu-stances -entione" aboe be present

(& By any person .ho, un"er any of the circu-stances -entione" in paragraph 7

hereof, shall co--it an act of seual assault by inserting his penis into another

persons -outh or anal orifice, or any instru-ent or ob2ect, into the genital or anal

orifice of another person!

Thus, un"er the ne. proision, rape can be co--itte" in t.o .ays0

7! $rticle (??;$ paragraph 7 refers to Rape through seual intercourse,

also 8no.n as 9organ rape9 or 9penile rape!9@< The central ele-ent in rape

through seual intercourse is carnal 8no.le"ge, .hich -ust be proen

beyon" reasonable "oubt!@?

(! $rticle (??;$ paragraph ( refers to rape by seual assault, also calle"

9instru-ent or ob2ect rape,9 or 9gen"er;free rape!9@:

It -ust be atten"e"by any of the circu-stances enu-erate" in subparagraphs %a& to %"& of

paragraph 7!@)

In People ! $bulon,@+ this Court "ifferentiate" the t.o -o"es of co--itting rape as

follo.s0

%7& In the first -o"e, the offen"er is al.ays a -an, .hile in the secon",

the offen"er -ay be a -an or a .o-an

%(& In the first -o"e, the offen"e" party is al.ays a .o-an, .hile in the

secon", the offen"e" party -ay be a -an or a .o-an

%5& In the first -o"e, rape is co--itte" through penile penetration of the

agina, .hile the secon" is co--itte" by inserting the penis into another

persons -outh or anal orifice, or any instru-ent or ob2ect into the genital

or anal orifice of another person an"

%@& The penalty for rape un"er the first -o"e is higher than that un"er the

secon"!

Fn"er $rticle (??;$, paragraph ( of the Reise" Penal Co"e, as a-en"e", rape by

seual assault is 9by any person .ho, un"er any of the circu-stances -entione" in

paragraph 7 hereof, shall co--it an act of seual assault by inserting his penis into

another persons -outh or anal orifice, or any instru-ent or ob2ect, into the genital

or anal orifice of another person!9

$$$ positiely an" consistently state" that Pare2a, in Dece-ber (**5, inserte" his

penis into her anus! =hile she -ay not hae been certain about the "etails of the

6ebruary (**@ inci"ent, she .as positie that Pare2a ha" anal se .ith her in

Dece-ber (**5, thus, clearly establishing the occurrence of rape by seual assault!

In other .or"s, her testi-ony on this account .as, as the Court of $ppeals foun",

clear, positie, an" probable!<*

Ho.eer, since the charge in the Infor-ation for the Dece-ber (**5 inci"ent is

rape through carnal 8no.le"ge, Pare2a cannot be foun" guilty of rape by seual

assault een though it .as proen "uring trial! This is "ue to the -aterial

"ifferences an" substantial "istinctions bet.een the t.o -o"es of rape thus, the

first -o"e is not necessarily inclu"e" in the secon", an" ice;ersa! Conse>uently,

to conict Pare2a of rape by seual assault .hen .hat he .as charge" .ith .as rape

through carnal 8no.le"ge, .oul" be to iolate his constitutional right to be infor-e"

of the nature an" cause of the accusation against hi-!<7

Neertheless, Pare2a -ay be conicte" of the lesser cri-e of acts of lasciiousness

un"er the ariance "octrine e-bo"ie" in Section @, in relation to Section <, Rule

7(* of the Rules of Cri-inal Proce"ure,<( to .it0

S#C! @! 'u"g-ent in case of ariance bet.een allegation an" proof! =hen there is

a ariance bet.een the offense charge" in the co-plaint or infor-ation an" that

proe", an" the offense as charge" is inclu"e" in or necessarily inclu"es the offense

proe", the accuse" shall be conicte" of the offense proe" .hich is inclu"e" in the

offense charge", or of the offense charge" .hich is inclu"e" in the offense proe"!

S#C! <! =hen an offense inclu"es or is inclu"e" in another! $n offense charge"

necessarily inclu"es the offense proe" .hen so-e of the essential ele-ents or

ingre"ients of the for-er, as allege" in the co-plaint or infor-ation, constitute the

latter! $n" an offense charge" is necessarily inclu"e" in the offense proe", .hen

the essential ingre"ients of the for-er constitute or for- part of those constitutingthe latter!

$rticle 55? of the Reise" Penal Co"e proi"es0

$rt! 55?! $cts of lasciiousness! $ny person .ho shall co--it any act of

lasciiousness upon other persons of either se, un"er any of the circu-stances

-entione" in the prece"ing article, shall be punishe" by prisin correccional!

The ele-ents of the aboe cri-e are as follo.s0

%7& That the offen"er co--its any act of lasciiousness or le."ness
























%(& That it is "one un"er any of the follo.ing circu-stances0

a! By using force or inti-i"ation or

b! =hen the offen"e" party is "eprie" of reason or other.ise

unconscious or

c! =hen the offen"e" party is un"er 7( years of age an"

%5& That the offen"e" party is another person of either se!<5 %Citation

o-itte"!&

Clearly, the aboe;-entione" ele-ents are present in the Dece-ber (**5 inci"ent,

an" .ere sufficiently establishe" "uring trial! Thus, een though the cri-e charge"

against Pare2a .as for rape through carnal 8no.le"ge, he can be conicte" of the

cri-e of acts of lasciiousness .ithout iolating any of his constitutional rights

because sai" cri-e is inclu"e" in the cri-e of rape!<@

Nonetheless, the Court ta8es this case as an opportunity to re-in" the State, the

People of the Philippines, as represente" by the public prosecutor, to eert -ore

"iligence in crafting the Infor-ation, .hich contains the charge against an accuse"!The pri-ary "uty of a la.yer in public prosecution is to see that 2ustice is "one<<

to the State, that its penal la.s are not bro8en an" or"er -aintaine" to the icti-,

that his or her rights are in"icate" an" to the offen"er, that he is 2ustly punishe"

for his cri-e! $ faulty an" "efectie Infor-ation, such as that in Cri-inal Case No!

*@;7<<?;C63, "oes not ren"er full 2ustice to the State, the offen"e" party, an" een

the offen"er! Thus, the public prosecutor shoul" al.ays see to it that the

Infor-ation is accurate an" appropriate!

Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<?;C630

The 6ebruary (**@ Inci"ent

It is -anifest that the RTC carefully .eighe" all the ei"ence presente" by the

prosecution against Pare2a, especially $$$s testi-ony! In its scrutiny, the RTC foun"

$$$s "eclaration on the rape in the Dece-ber (**5 inci"ent cre"ible enough to

result in a coniction, albeit this Court ha" to -o"ify it as eplaine" aboe!

Ho.eer, it "i" not fin" that the sa-e leel of proof, i!e!, beyon" reasonable "oubt,

.as fully satisfie" by the prosecution in its charge of atte-pte" rape an" a secon"

count of rape against Pare2a! In Cri-inal Case No! *@;7<<?;C63, or the 6ebruary

(**@ inci"ent, the RTC consi"ere" $$$s confusion as to .hether or not she .as

actually penetrate" by Pare2a, an" eentually resole" the -atter in Pare2as faor!

This Court agrees .ith such fin"ings! $$$, in her Sinu-paang Salaysay,<? state"

that asi"e fro- suc8ing her breasts, Pare2a also inserte" his finger in her agina!

Ho.eer, she .as not able to gie a clear an" conincing account of such insertion

"uring her testi-ony! Despite being repeate"ly as8e" by the prosecutor as to .hat

follo.e" after her breasts .ere suc8e", $$$ faile" to testify, in open court, that

Pare2a also inserte" his finger in her agina! 3oreoer, later on, she a""e" that

Pare2a inserte" his penis in her agina "uring that inci"ent! Thus, because of the

-aterial o-issions an" inconsistencies, Pare2a cannot be conicte" of rape in the

6ebruary (**@ inci"ent! Nonetheless, Pare2as acts of placing hi-self on top of $$$

an" suc8ing her breasts, fall un"er the cri-e of acts of lasciiousness, .hich, as .e

hae "iscusse" aboe, is inclu"e" in the cri-e of rape!

Verily, $$$ .as again positie an" consistent in her account of ho. Pare2a suc8e"

both her breasts in the 6ebruary (**@ inci"ent! Thus, Pare2a .as correctly conicte"

by the courts a >uo of the cri-e of acts of lasciiousness!

Defense of Denial

an" I-proper 3otie

Pare2a sought to escape liability by "enying the charges against hi-, couple" .ith

the attribution of ill -otie against $$$! He clai-s that $$$ file" these cases

against hi- because she .as angry that he cause" her parents separation! Pare2a

a""e" that these cases .ere initiate" by $$$s father, as reenge against hi-!<:

Such contention is untenable! 9$$$s cre"ibility cannot be "i-inishe" or tainte" by

such i-putation of ill -oties!1âwphi1 It is highly unthin8able for the icti- to

falsely accuse her father solely by reason of ill -oties or gru"ge!9<)6urther-ore,

-oties such as resent-ent, hatre" or reenge hae neer s.aye" this Court fro-

giing full cre"ence to the testi-ony of a -inor rape icti-!<+ In People !

3anuel,?* .e hel"0

#i"ently, no .o-an, least of all a chil", .oul" concoct a story of "efloration, allo.

ea-ination of her priate parts an" sub2ect herself to public trial or ri"icule if she

has not, in truth, been a icti- of rape an" i-pelle" to see8 2ustice for the .rong

"one to her being! It is settle" 2urispru"ence that testi-onies of chil";icti-s are

gien full .eight an" cre"it, since .hen a .o-an or a girl;chil" says that she hasbeen rape", she says in effect all that is necessary to sho. that rape .as in"ee"

co--itte"!

iability for $cts of asciiousness

The penalty for acts of lasciiousness un"er $rticle 55? of the Reise" Penal Co"e is

prisin correccional in its full range! $pplying the In"eter-inate Sentence a.,?7 the

-ini-u- of the in"eter-inate penalty shall be ta8en fro- the full range of the

penalty net lo.er in "egree,?( i!e!, arresto -ayor, .hich ranges fro- 7 -onth an"

7 "ay to ? -onths!?5 The -ai-u- of the in"eter-inate penalty shall co-e fro-

the proper penalty?@ that coul" be i-pose" un"er the Reise" Penal Co"e for $cts of

asciiousness,?< .hich, in this case, absent any aggraating or -itigating
































circu-stance, is the -e"iu- perio" of prisin correccional, ranging fro- ( years, @

-onths an" 7 "ay to @ years an" ( -onths!??

In line .ith preailing 2urispru"ence, the Court -o"ifies the a.ar" of "a-ages as

follo.s0 P(*,***!** as ciil in"e-nity?: P5*,***!** as -oral "a-ages

an" P7*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages,?) for each count of acts of lasciiousness!

$ll a-ounts shall bear legal interest at the rate of ?M per annu- fro- the "ate of

finality of this 2u"g-ent!

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the Decision of the Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R!CR!;H!C! No! *5:+@ is hereby $66IR3#D .ith 3ODI6IC$TION! =e fin" accuse";

appellant Bernabe Pare2a y Cru4 /FITG of t.o counts of $cts of asciiousness,

"efine" an" penali4e" un"er $rticle 55? of the Reise" Penal Co"e, as a-en"e"! He

is sentence" to t.o %(& in"eter-inate prison ter-s of ? -onths of arresto -ayor, as

-ini-u-, to @ years an" ( -onths of prisi?n correccional, as -ai-u- an" is

ORD#R#D to pay the icti-, $$$, P(*,***!** as ciil in"e-nity, P5*,***!** as

-oral "a-ages, an" P7*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages, for each count of acts of

lasciiousness, all .ith interest at the rate of ?M per annu- fro- the "ate of

finality of this 2u"g-ent!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 1+0462 $-r&r 5, 2014

RO"OL$O GUEARRA &'( !OE% GUEARRA, Petitioners,

s!


D # C I S I O N

RION, J.:

=e reie. in this petition for reie. on certiorari7 the "ecision( "ate" October (@,

(**< of the Court of $ppeals %C$& in C$;/!R! CR No! ())++! The C$ affir-e", .ith

-o"ification on the a-ount of "a-ages, the 2oint "ecision5 "ate" $pril 7?, (**@ of

the Regional Trial Court %RTC&, Branch (*, Cauayan City, Isabela, fin"ing Ro"olfo

/uearra an" 'oey /uearra %petitioners& guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the

cri-es of frustrate" ho-ici"e an" ho-ici"e!

6actual $ntece"ents

Ro"olfo an" his son, 'oey, .ere charge" .ith the cri-es of frustrate" ho-ici"e an"

ho-ici"e un"er t.o Infor-ations .hich rea"0

In Cri-inal Case No! Br! (*;7<?* for 6rustrate" Ho-ici"e0

That on or about the )th "ay of 'anuary, (***, in the -unicipality of $licia, proince

of Isabela, Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the sai"

accuse", conspiring, confe"erating together an" helping one another, .ith intent to

8ill an" .ithout any 2ust -otie, "i" then an" there, .illfully, unla.fully an"

feloniously, assault, attac8, hac8 an" stab for seeral ti-es .ith a sharp pointe"

bolo one #r.in Or"one4, .ho as a result thereof, suffere" -ultiple hac8 an" stab

.oun"s on the "ifferent parts of his bo"y, .hich in2uries .oul" or"inarily cause the

"eath of the sai" #r.in Or"one4, thus, perfor-ing all the acts of eecution .hich

shoul" hae pro"uce" the cri-e of ho-ici"e as a conse>uence, but neertheless,"i" not pro"uce it by reason of causes in"epen"ent of their .ill, that is, by the

ti-ely an" able -e"ical assistance ren"ere" to the sai" #r.in Or"one4, .hich

preente" his "eath!@

In Cri-inal Case No! Br! (*;7<?7 for Ho-ici"e0

That on or about the )th "ay of 'anuary, (***, in the -unicipality of $licia, proince

of Isabela, Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the sai"

accuse", conspiring, confe"erating together an" helping one another, .ith intent to

8ill an" .ithout any 2ust -otie, "i" then an" there, .illfully, unla.fully an"

feloniously, assault, attac8, hac8 an" stab for seeral ti-es .ith a sharp pointe"



















bolo one Dai" Or"one4, .ho as a result thereof, suffere" -ultiple hac8 an" stab

.oun"s on the "ifferent parts of his bo"y .hich "irectly cause" his "eath!<

$lthough the infor-ations state" that the cri-es .ere co--itte" on 'anuary ),

(***, the true "ate of their co--ission is Noe-ber ), (***, as confir-e" by the

C$ through the recor"s!? The parties faile" to raise any ob2ection to the

"iscrepancy!:

On arraign-ent, the petitioners plea"e" not guilty to both charges!) The cases .ere

2ointly trie" .ith the confor-ity of the prosecution an" the "efense! $t the pre;trial,the petitioners interpose" self;"efense, .hich pro-pte" the RTC to con"uct a

reerse trial of the case!+

During the trial, the parties presente" "ifferent ersions of the eents that

transpire" on Noe-ber ), (***!

Version of the Defense

To proe the petitionersA clai- of self;"efense, the "efense presente" the

testi-onies of Ro"olfo, 'oey, an" the petitionersA neighbor, Balbino $gustin!

Testi-ony of Ro"olfo

Ro"olfo, .ho .as then fifty;fie %<<& years ol", narrate" that, at aroun" 77 0**

p!-!, on Noe-ber ), (***, brothers #r.in Or"one4 an" Dai" Or"one4, together

.ith their co-panion, Philip Vingua, force" their .ay into his co-poun" an" thre.

stones at his house an" tricycle! Through the bac8 "oor of his house, Ro"olfo .ent

"o.n to the base-ent or 9silungA an" shoute" at the three -en to stop! Dai" sa.

hi-, threatene" to 8ill hi-, an" struc8 hi- .ith a AApanabas,9 hitting hi- on the

pal- of his left han"! Ro"olfo respon"e" by reaching for the bolo tuc8e" in the

9so1era9 of his house, an" hac8e" an" stabbe" #r.in an" Dai" until the t.o

brothers fell to the groun"! Fpon seeing #r.in an" Dai" lying on the groun",

Ro"olfo calle" on so-eone to bring the brothers to the hospital! He staye" in his

house until the police-en arrie"!

Testi-ony of 'oey

'oey, .ho .as then thirty;one %57& years ol", narrate" that, at aroun" 770** p!-!,

on Noe-ber ), (***, he .as a.a8ene" by the soun" of stones being thro.n at

their house in Bliss, Pa""a", $licia, Isabela! Through the .in"o., he sa. #r.in,

Dai" an" Philip brea8ing into their gate, .hich .as -a"e of .oo" an" interlin8

.ire an" locate" fie % <& to si % ?& -eters a.ay fro- their house! He then hear"

his father Ro"olfo say to the three -en, 98ung ano -an ang proble-a bu8as na

natin pag;usapan,97* an" Dai" retorte" in their "ialect, 9O8inina- nga la8ay a""a

8a gaya- "ita, patayin ta8a!977

Testi-ony of Balbino

Balbino narrate" that, fro- insi"e his house in Bliss, Pa""a", $licia, Isabela, at

aroun" 7*0** p!-!, on Noe-ber ), (***, he hear" a person fro- the outsi"e

saying 9Sige banatan ninyo na!97( He opene" his "oor an" sa. Dai", #r.in an"

Philip thro.ing stones at the house of h is neighbor Crisanto Briones! Briones got

-a" an" scol"e" the three -en, 9=hy are you hitting -y house =hy "onAt you hit

the house of your ene-y, -ga taranta"o 8ayoU975Dai", #r.in an" Philip then ai-e"

their stones at the petitionersA house! Balbino hear" Dai" calling out to 'oey, 9'oey,

8ung tunay 8ang lala8i lu-abas 8a "iyan sa 8alsa"a at "ito tayo -agpatayan,97@

butno one ca-e out of Ro"olfoAs house! The stoning laste" for about thirty %5*&

-inutes!

$fter.ar"s, Balbino sa. Dai", #r.in an" Philip "estroy Ro"olfoAs gate an" pull the

gate to.ar"s the roa"! He hear" Dai" say to his co-panions, 98oberan ninyo a8o

at papaso8 8a-i!97< Dai", #r.in an" Philip entere" the petitionersA co-poun" an"

"a-age" Ro"olfoAs tricycle .ith stones an" their AApanabas!9 $lso, he hear" Ro"olfo

say to Dai" in 6ilipino that they coul" 2ust tal8 about their proble-s .ith hi- the

follo.ing "ay! But Dai" approache" Ro"olfo an" hac8e" hi- .ith a AApanabas!9

Ro"olfo parrie" the blo. .ith the bac8 of his han", an" Dai" an" Ro"olfo struggle"

for the possession of the AApanabas!9

Balbino also sa. #r.in hit Ro"olfo on the face . ith a stone an" 'oey .as hit on his

right foot, causing Ro"olfo an" 'oey to retreat to the 9silung9 of their house fro-

.here Ro"olfo got 9so-ething shiny,9 an" .ith it stabbe" Dai" an" #r.in! He sa.

the t.o brothers fall to the groun"!

Version of the Prosecution

$s its rebuttal .itness, the prosecution presente" the sole testi-ony of #r.in .ho

surie" the hac8ing!

#r.in narrate" that, at aroun" 7*0** to 77 0** p!-!, on Noe-ber ), (***, he, his

brother Dai" an" Philip .ent to a birth"ay party an" passe" in front of the

petitionersA co-poun"! He .as .al8ing t.enty %(*& -eters ahea" of his co-panions

.hen, su""enly, Philip ran up to hi- saying that Dai" .as being stabbe" by 'oey

.ith a bolo! =hile approaching the scene of the stabbing, .hich .as three %5&

-eters a.ay fro- .here his brother Dai" .as, #r.in .as -et by Ro"olfo .ho then

hac8e" hi-, hitting his ar- an" bac8! Thereafter, Ro"olfo an" 'oey "ragge" #r.in

insi"e the petitionersA co-poun" an" 8ept on hac8ing hi-! He .as hac8e" an"

stabbe" thirteen %75& ti-es! He beca-e .ea8 an" ulti-ately fell to the groun"!

#r.in "enie" that he an" Dai" thre. stones at the petitionersA house an" "a-age"

Ro"olfoAs tricycle!1âwphi1 They "i" not li8e.ise "estroy the petitionersA gate, .hich

.as only "a-age" .hen his brother Dai" clung on to it .hile he .as being pulle"

by Ro"olfo an" #r.in into their co-poun"! =hile they .ere being hac8e" an"



























stabbe" by Ro"olfo an" #r.in, stones actually raine" on the- an" people outsi"e

the petitionersA gate .ere saying, 9Do not 8ill the brothers! $llo. the- to co-e

out!97?

$fter the inci"ent, #r.in an" Dai", both unconscious, .ere brought to the hospital!

Dai" "ie" in the hospital .hile being treate" for his .oun"s!

The RTCAs Ruling

In a "ecision "ate" $pril 7?, (**@, the RTC gae cre"ence to the prosecutionAs

ersion of the inci"ent an" foun" the petitioners guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of

the cri-es of frustrate" ho-ici"e an" ho-ici"e! It "isbeliee" the "efenseAs ersion

of the eents "ue to -aterial inconsistencies in the testi-onies of the "efense

.itnesses! It "enie" the petitionersA clai- of self;"efense for lac8 of clear,

conincing an" satisfactory supporting ei"ence!

The RTC eplaine" in its "ecision that 9K.Lhen an accuse" ino8es the 2ustifying

circu-stance of self;"efense, he loses the constitutional presu-ption of innocence

an" assu-es the bur"en of proing, .ith clear an" conincing ei"ence, the

2ustification for his act97: that self;"efense is an affir-atie allegation .hich -ust

be proen .ith certainty by sufficient, satisfactory an" conincing ei"ence that

eclu"es any estige of cri-inal aggression on the part of the person ino8ingit!7) The RTC hel" that the petitioners -iserably faile" to proe that there .as

unla.ful aggression on the part of the icti-s, #r.in an" Dai"!

$ccor"ingly, the RTC "ispose" of the case as follo.s0

=H#R#6OR#, fin"ing the accuse" Ro"olfo /uearra an" 'oey /uearra guilty

beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-es for .hich they are charge", an" absent any

-itigating or aggraating circu-stance1s that atten"e" the co--ission of the

cri-es, the Court hereby sentences each of the accuse" to suffer ;In Cri-inal Case

No! Br! (*;7<?* for 6rustrate" Ho-ici"e ; an in"eter-inate penalty ranging fro-

Three %5& years an" one "ay of prision correccional as -ini-u- to Nine %+& years of

prision -ayor as -ai-u- an" to in"e-nify the icti- #r.in Or"one4 -oral"a-ages in the a-ount of T.enty Thousan" %P(*,***!**& Pesos, .ithout any

subsi"iary i-prison-ent in case of insolency! Cost against the accuse"!

In Cri-inal Case No! Br! (*;7<?7 for Ho-ici"e ; an in"eter-inate penalty ranging

fro- #ight %)& years an" one "ay of prision -ayor as -ini-u- to 6ifteen %7<& years

of Reclusion Te-poral as -ai-u- an" to in"e-nify the heirs of the "ecease"

Dai" Or"one4 Sity Thousan" %P?*,***!**& Pesos plus Thirty Thousan"

%P5*,***!**& Pesos as -oral "a-ages .ithout subsi"iary i-prison-ent in case of

insolency! Costs against the accuse"!

The bail bon"s of the accuse" are C$NC##D!7+

The C$As Ruling

On appeal, the C$ affir-e" the RTCAs 2u"g-ent an" conicte" the petitioners of the

cri-es charge"! $s the RTC "i", the C$ foun" that #r.in an" Dai" co--itte" no

unla.ful aggression sufficient to proo8e the actions of the petitioners that

9aggression, to be unla.ful, -ust be actual an" i--inent, such that there is a real

threat of bo"ily har- to the person resorting to self;"efense or to others .ho- that

person is see8ing to "efen"!9(* #en assu-ing the truth of the petitionersA clai-s

that Dai" challenge" 'oey to a fight an" threatene" to 8ill Ro"olfo on the night of

Noe-ber ), (***, the C$ hel" that these acts "o not constitute unla.fulaggression to 2ustify the petitionersA actions as no real or actual "anger eiste" as

the petitioners .ere then insi"e the safety of their o.n ho-e!

The C$ further hel" that the petitionersA plea of self;"efense .as belie" by the

nature an" nu-ber of .oun"s inflicte" on #r.in, .ho sustaine" thirteen %75& stab

.oun"s on his ar- an" bac8, an" Dai", .ho suffere" aroun" ten %7*& stab .oun"s

on his bac8 an" sto-ach causing his "eath! These .oun"s logically in"icate" that

the assault .as no longer an act of self;"efense but a "eter-ine" ho-ici"al

aggression on the part of the petitioners!(7

The C$, ho.eer, foun" error in the a-ounts of ciil in"e-nity an" -oral "a-ages

a.ar"e" by the RTC! Thus, the C$ -o"ifie" the RTCAs "ecision in this .ise0

=H#R#6OR#, the appeale" Decision is $66IR3#D .ith 3ODI6IC$TION! In Cri-!

Case No! Br! (*;7<?7, appellants RODO6O /F#V$RR$ an" 'O#G /F#V$RR$ are

each or"ere" to pay the heirs of the "ecease" Dai" Or"one4 the su- of 6ifty

Thousan" Pesos %P!<*,***!**& as ciil in"e-nity an" another 6ifty Thousan" Pesos

%P<*,***!**& as -oral "a-ages!((

The Petition

In the present petition, the petitioners raise the follo.ing issues0

$!

=H#TH#R OR NOT TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN 6$IIN/ TO

$PPR#CI$T# TH# PR#S#NC# O6 TH# 'FSTI6GIN/ CIRCF3ST$NC# O6 S#6;

D#6#NS# D#SPIT# C#$R $ND CONVINCIN/ #VID#NC# SHO=IN/ TH# ##3#NTS

O6 S#6;D#6#NS#!

B!

=H#TH#R OR NOT TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN /IVIN/ 6F

CR#D#NC# TO TH# T#STI3ONG O6 TH# ON# =ITN#SS O6 TH# PROS#CFTION!


















C!

=H#TH#R OR NOT TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN NOT

$CJFITTIN/ P#TITION#R 'O#G /F#V$RR$ =HO H$S NO P$RTICIP$TION IN TH#

S$ID INCID#NT!(5

Our Ruling

=e "eny the present petition as .e fin" no reersible error in the C$ "ecision of

October (@, (**<!

$t the outset, .e e-phasi4e that the CourtAs reie. of the present case is ia a

petition for reie. un"er Rule @<, .hich generally bars any >uestion pertaining to

the factual issues raise"! The .ell;settle" rule is that >uestions of fact are not

reie.able in petitions for reie. un"er Rule @<, sub2ect only to certain eceptions,

a-ong the-, the lac8 of sufficient support in ei"ence of the trial courtAs 2u"g-ent

or the appellate courtAs -isapprehension of the a""uce" facts!(@

The petitioners fail to conince us that .e shoul" reie. the fin"ings of fact in this

case! 6actual fin"ings of the RTC, .hen affir-e" by the C$, are entitle" to great

.eight an" respect by this Court an" are "ee-e" final an" conclusie .hen

supporte" by the ei"ence on recor"!(< =e fin" that both the RTC an" the C$ fully

consi"ere" the ei"ence presente" by the prosecution an" the "efense, an" they

hae a"e>uately eplaine" the legal an" ei"entiary reasons in conclu"ing that the

petitioners are guilty of the cri-es of frustrate" ho-ici"e an" ho-ici"e!

In the absence of any sho.ing that the trial an" appellate courts oerloo8e" certain

facts an" circu-stances that coul" substantially affect the outco-e of the present

case, .e uphol" the rulings of the RTC an" the C$ .hich foun" the ele-ents of

these cri-es fully establishe" "uring the trial!

The cri-e of frustrate" ho-ici"e is co--itte" .hen0 %7& an 9accuse" inten"e" to

8ill his icti-, as -anifeste" by his use of a "ea"ly .eapon in his assault %(& the

icti- sustaine" fatal or -ortal .oun"1s but "i" not "ie because of ti-ely -e"ical

assistance an" %5& none of the >ualifying circu-stance for -ur"er un"er $rticle

(@) of the Reise" Penal Co"e is present!9(?

On the other han", the cri-e of ho-ici"e is co--itte" .hen0 %7& a person is 8ille"

%(& the accuse" 8ille" that person .ithout any 2ustifying circu-stance %5& the

accuse" ha" the intention to 8ill, .hich is presu-e" an" % @& the 8illing .as not

atten"e" by any of the >ualifying circu-stances of -ur"er, or by that of parrici"e or

infantici"e!(:

The petitionersA intent to 8ill .as clearly establishe" by the nature an" nu-ber of

.oun"s sustaine" by their icti-s! #i"ence to proe intent to 8ill in cri-es against

persons -ay consist, a-ong other things, of the -eans use" by the -alefactors

the con"uct of the -alefactors before, at the ti-e of, or i--e"iately after the 8illing

of the icti- an" the nature, location an" nu-ber of .oun"s sustaine" by the

icti-!() The C$ aptly obsere" that the ten %7*& hac81stab .oun"s Dai" suffere"

an" .hich eentually cause" his "eath, an" the thirteen %75& hac81stab .oun"s

#r.in sustaine", confir-e" the prosecutionAs theory that the petitioners purposely

an" igorously attac8e" Dai" an" #r.in!(+

In fact, the petitioners a"-itte" at the pre;trial that 9the .oun"s inflicte" on the

icti- #r.in Or"one4 .oul" hae cause" his "eath .ere it not for i--e"iate

-e"ical atten"ance!95*

By ino8ing self;"efense, the petitioners, in effect, a"-itte" to the co--ission of

the acts for .hich they .ere charge", albeit un"er circu-stances that, if proen,

.oul" hae eculpate" the-! =ith this a"-ission, the bur"en of proof shifte" to the

petitioners to sho. that the 8illing an" frustrate" 8illing of Dai" an" #r.in,

respectiely, .ere atten"e" by the follo.ing circu-stances0 %7& unla.ful aggression

on the part of the icti-s %(& reasonable necessity of the -eans e-ploye" to

preent or repel such aggression an" %5& lac8 of sufficient proocation on the part

of the persons resorting to self;"efense!57

Of all the bur"ens the petitioners carrie", the -ost i-portant of all is the ele-ent of

unla.ful aggression! Fnla.ful aggression is an actual physical assault, or at least athreat to inflict real i--inent in2ury, upon a person!5( The ele-ent of unla.ful

aggression -ust be proen first in or"er for self;"efense to be successfully plea"e"!

There can be no self;"efense, .hether co-plete or inco-plete, unless the icti-

ha" co--itte" unla.ful aggression against the person .ho resorte" to self;

"efense!55

$s the RTC an" the C$ "i", .e fin" the absence of the ele-ent of unla.ful

aggression on the part of the icti-s! $s the prosecution fully establishe", #r.in

an" Dai" .ere 2ust passing by the petitionersA co-poun" on the night of Noe-ber

), (*** .hen Dai" .as su""enly attac8e" by 'oey .hile #r.in .as attac8e" by

Ro"olfo! The attac8 actually too8 place outsi"e, not insi"e, the petitionersA

co-poun", as ei"ence" by the .ay the petitionersA gate .as "estroye"! The-anner by .hich the .oo"en gate post .as bro8en coinci"e" .ith #r.inAs

testi-ony that his brother Dai", .ho .as then clinging onto the gate, .as "ragge"

into the petitionersA co-poun"! These circu-stances, couple" .ith the nature an"

nu-ber of .oun"s sustaine" by the icti-s, clearly sho. that the petitioners "i"

not act in self;"efense in 8illing Dai" an" .oun"ing #r.in! The petitioners .ere, in

fact, the real aggressors!

As to the penalties and damages

awarded

=e affir- the penalties i-pose" upon the petitioners, as they are .ell . ithin the

ranges proi"e" by la., but -o"ify the "a-ages a.ar"e" by the C$!


























In a""ition to the P<*,***!** ciil in"e-nity an" P<*,***!** -oral "a-ages

a.ar"e" by the C$, .e a.ar"P(<,***!** to each of the icti-s as te-perate

"a-ages, in lieu of the actual "a-ages they sustaine" by reason of the cri-es!

$rticle (((@ of the Ciil Co"e states that te-perate or -o"erate "a-ages -ay be

recoere" .hen the court fin"s that so-e pecuniary loss has been suffere" but its

a-ount cannot be proe" . ith certainty!

$lso, .e i-pose on all the -onetary a.ar"s for "a-ages interest at the legal rate

of si percent % ?M& per annu- fro- "ate of finality of the "ecision until fully pai"!5@

=H#R#6OR#, the petition is D#NI#D! The "ecision "ate" October (@, (**< of the

Court of $ppeals is hereby $66IR3#D .ith 3ODI6IC$TION in that the petitioners are

also or"ere" to pay #r.in Or"one4 an" the heirs of Dai" Or"one4 the a-ount

of P(<,***!** as te-perate "a-ages!

The petitioners shall pay interest at the rate of si percent %?M& per annu- on the

ciil in"e-nity, -oral an" te-perate "a-ages fro- the finality of this "ecision until

fully pai"!

SO ORD#R#D!


3anila

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 16*4 $-r&r 12, 2014

RICAR"O L. ATIEN#A AN" AL$RE"O A. CASTRO, Petitioners,s!PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Respon"ent!

D # C I S I O N

PERLAS8ERNAE, J.:

$ssaile" in this petition for reie. on certiorari7 is the Decision( "ate" Noe-ber (),

(**) of the Court of $ppeals %C$& in C$;/!R! CR! No! 5*?<* .hich affir-e" the











Decision5 "ate" 'une ), (**? of the Regional Trial Court of 3anila, Branch (7 %RTC&in Cri-inal Case Nos! *7;7+:@(< an" *7;7+:@(?, fin"ing petitioners Ricar"o !$tien4a %$tien4a& an" $lfre"o $! Castro %Castro& guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt ofthe cri-es of Robbery an" 6alsification of Public Docu-ent!

The 6acts

$tien4a an" Castro %petitioners& are e-ployees of the C$, particularly assigne" toits Bu"get Diision an" hol"ing the positions of Bu"get Officer I an" Ftility =or8erI,@ respectiely, at the ti-e -aterial to this case!

On 3arch (*, 7++<, at about past noon,< 'uanito $tibula %$tibula&, Recor"s Officer Ian" Custo"ian of the C$ Original Decisions in the C$ Reporters Diision, .as inite"by Castro to atten" $tien4as birth"ay party so-e.here along Bocobo Street,#r-ita, 3anila! $t the party, $tien4a intro"uce" $tibula to a certain Dario an" as8e"hi- to assist the latter in searching for the C$ "ecision? in the case entitle" 93ateo6ernan"o ! Heirs of D! Tuason, Inc!9: %6ernan"o&, "oc8ete" as C$;/!R! No! 5?)*);R!)

Thereafter, $tibula returne" to the office follo.e" a fe. -inutes later by Dario an" searche" for the afore-entione" "ecision .hich .as foun" co-pile" in Volu-e(?* of the C$ Original Decisions! $s Dario .as scanning through the sai" olu-e,$tibula obsere" that he .as co-paring its pages+ to the "iscolore" papers he .as

hol"ing!

7*

Dario li8e.ise scanne" Volu-es (?< an" (?:,

77

an" place" chec8 -ar8son the papers he .as hol"ing!7(

On 3arch (@, 7++<, after office hours, $tibula sa. Dario outsi"e the C$ co-poun"along 3aria Orosa Street!75 $s they .al8e" si"e by si"e to.ar"s the 2eepney stop,Dario re>ueste" $tibula to insert a Decision "ate" Septe-ber (?, 7+?) in one of theolu-es of the C$ Original Decisions! Ho.eer, $tibula refuse" an" i--e"iatelyleft!7@

On $pril (7, 7++<, $tien4a offere" $tibula the a-ount of P<*,***!** in echangefor Volu-e (?*,7< .hich the latter turne" "o.n! $tien4a then ri"icule" hi- saying,9"u.ag 8a, pera na nga ito aya. -o pa,9 to .hich $tibula retorte", 9i8a. ang"u.ag "ahil nagpapa8ita 8a ng 8abu8tutan!9

Disturbe" by the situation, $tibula reporte" the inci"ent to $tty! $rnel3acapagal7? %$tty! 3acapagal&, the $ssistant Chief of the C$ Reporters Diision,.ho then instructe" hi- %$tibula& to hi"e Volu-es (?*, (?< an" (?:7: in a safeplace!7)

On 3ay +, 7++<, $tibula "iscoere" that Volu-e (??7+ coering the perio" fro-'anuary () to 6ebruary 7(, 7+?+ .as -issing(* an", hence, i--e"iately reporte"the sa-e to $tty! 3acapagal! T.o "ays after the "iscoery of the loss, $tibulaencountere" $tien4a near the canteen,(7 shouting 9KpLutang ina -o, 'uaning,pinahirapan -o 8a-iU9((

On 3ay 7), 7++<, a certain Nelson "e Castro, Cler8 IV "etaile" at the C$ ReportersDiision,(5 han"e" to $tibula a bag containing a gift;.rappe" pac8age .hich turne"

out to be the -issing Volu-e (??! He clai-e" that it .as Castro .ho as8e" hi- to"elier the sai" pac8age to $tibula!(@

Haing been notifie" of Volu-e (??s return, $tty! 3acapagal then "irecte" $tibulato ascertain .ho borro.e" the olu-e! Recor"s, ho.eer, "isclose" noone!(< Separately, $tibula co-pare" the contents of Volu-e (?? .ith the in"e ofthe "ecisions an" notice" that there .ere t.o ne. "ocu-ents inserte"therein,(? na-ely0 %a& a Resolution(:"ate" 6ebruary 77, 7+?+ %sub2ect resolution&,ostensibly penne" by $ssociate 'ustice 'uan P! #nri>ue4 %'ustice #nri>ue4& an"concurre" in by $ssociate 'ustices 3agno S! /at-aitan an" #"ilberto Soriano,

recalling an" setting asi"e the #ntry of 'u"g-ent earlier issue" in the 6ernan"ocase an" %b& a Decision() "ate" $pril 7?, 7+:* %sub2ect "ecision&, also ostensiblypenne" by 'ustice #nri>ue4 an" concurre" in by $ssociate 'ustices 'esus G! Pere4an" 'ose 3! 3en"o4a, a-en"ing the original "ecision "ate" Septe-ber (?, 7+?) inthe afore-entione" case! Conse>uently, $tibula reporte" his fin"ings to $tty!3acapagal .ho, in turn, infor-e" $tty! /e--a eticia 6! Tablate %$tty! Tablate&,then Chief of the C$ Reporters Diision, of the sa-e! They trie" to erify thegenuineness, authenticity an" eistence of the sub2ect resolution an" "ecision, an"foun" that the co-pilation of the "uplicate original "ecisions1resolutions of 'ustice#nri>ue4 "i" not bear the sai" pro-ulgations! $tty! Tablate reporte" the inci"ent tothen C$ Presi"ing 'ustice Nathanael P! De Pano, 'r!(+ .ho i--e"iately re>ueste" theNational Bureau of Inestigation %NBI& to con"uct an inestigation on the -atter!5*

aboratory analysis an" co-paratie ea-ination of the sub2ect resolution an"

"ecision57

as .ell as of a "ecision in another case foun" in pages +*? to +(( ofVolu-e (?? of the C$ Original Decisions .ere con"ucte" by the NBI!5($s a result, itissue" its Juestione" Docu-ents Report No! +5:;7(+<,55 fin"ing that0 %a& Volu-e(?? ha" in"ee" been altere"5@ an" %b& the signatures of the C$ 'ustices in thesub2ect resolution an" "ecision %>uestione" signatures& an" their stan"ar"1sa-plesignatures 9.ere not .ritten by one an" the sa-e person,95< lea"ing to theconclusion that the >uestione" signatures .ere forgeries!5?

3ean.hile, so-eti-e in the secon" .ee8 of 'uly 7++<, an inspection of the air;con"itioning units at the office of the C$ Reporters Diision .as con"ucte",.hereby it .as "iscoere" that the i-proise" angle bar supporting the aircon"itioning unit at the right -ost en" fro- the -ain "oor .as corro"e" .ith rustan" the portion of the .all hol"ing the sa-e .as bro8en %9-ay ba8;ba8 na9&!5: NBI$gents, $tty! Daniel D! Dagan4o5) %$tty! Dagan4o& an" Nor-an R!

Deca-pong5+

then con"ucte" an ocular inspection of the pre-ises, an", in thecourse thereof, interie.e" seeral personnel of the C$ 3aintenance Diision! Sai"inestigation yiel"e" the follo.ing fin"ings0 %a& there .ere no signs of forcibleentry@* %b& the perpetrators gaine" entry to the off ice of the C$ Reporters Diision9by passing through the hole on the concrete .all after re-oing the aircon"itioning unit9@7 locate" on the right -ost KsicL en" fro- the -ain "oor@( %c&there .as conspiracy to co--it the cri-e of 6alsification of Public Docu-entbet.een $tien4a an" Dario in ie. of their 9concerte" efforts through preious orsi-ultaneous acts an" "ee"s9@5 an" %"& Castro assiste" $tien4a an" Dario 9to profitfro- the effects of the cri-e by returning safely the -issing olu-e to the KC$Reporters DiisionL!9@@ Conse>uently, a cri-inal co-plaint .as file" by the NBI an"the 6act;6in"ing an" Intelligence Bureau of the Office of the O-bu"s-an against$tien4a, Castro, an" Dario before the #aluation an" Preli-inary InestigationBureau of the O3B, "oc8ete" as O3B;*;+:;(*<@,@< charging the- for the follo.ing

cri-es0 %a& 6alsification of Public Docu-ent %b& iolation of Section 5%a&

@?

of

















































































































Republic $ct No! %R$& 5*7+,@: as a-en"e" an" %c& iolation of Section )@) of R$?:75!@+

$fter inestigation, the charges inoling the pertinent proisions of R$s 5*7+ an"?:75 .ere "is-isse" for insufficiency of ei"ence,<* but it .as contrarily "eter-ine"that there eiste" probable cause to charge $tien4a, Castro, an" Dario<7 for thecri-es of Robbery un"er $rticle (++%a&%7&<( of the Reise" Penal Co"e<5 %RPC&, asa-en"e", an" of 6alsification of Public Docu-ent un"er $rticle 7:(%7&<@ in relationto $rticle 7:7%?&<< of the sa-e co"e! Thus, the correspon"ingInfor-ations,<? respectiely "oc8ete" as Cri-inal Case Nos! *7;7+:@(< an" *7;7+:@(?, .ere file" before the RTC! Petitioners poste" bail<: an", thereafter, plea"e"9not guilty9<) to the charges "uring their arraign-ent, .hile Dario re-aine" atlarge!

In his "efense, $tien4a "enie" haing anything to "o .ith the >uestione"inci"ents<+ as he .as not een su--one" by the C$ Cler8 of Court or the Chief ofthe Reporters Diision,?* an" beca-e a.are of the inci"ent only .hen he an"Castro .ere subpoenae" by the NBI Special Inestigators!?7 6urther, he gae thealibi that he .as out of the office @ "ays a .ee8 "uring the -onths of $pril to 'une7++<,?( reporting only on 6ri"ays,?5 since he ha" to perfor- his "uties as Bu"getOfficer I of the C$ Bu"get Diision an" iaison Officer to the Depart-ent of Bu"getan" 3anage-ent, the Co--ittee on $ppropriation of the Congress, Co--ittee on$ppropriation of the lo.er house, an" the Co--ittee on 6inance of the Senate an"the /SIS!

On the other han", Castro "i" not en"eaor to refute the allegations in theInfor-ations file" against hi- an" the other accuse"!?@

The RTC Ruling

$fter trial on the -erits, the RTC ren"ere" a Decision?< on 'une ), (**?, fin"ingpetitioners guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-es of Robbery un"er $rticle(++%a&%7& of the RPC an" 6alsification of Public Docu-ent un"er $rticle 7:(%7& inrelation to $rticle 7:7%?& of the RPC, an" sentence" the- to each suffer0 %a& thein"eter-inate penalty of si %?& -onths an" one %7& "ay, as -ini-u-, to t.o %(&years an" four %@& -onths of prision correccional, as -ai-u-, for the first cri-ean" %b& the penalty of si %?& -onths an" one %7& "ay, as -ini-u-, to si %?& years

of prision correccional, as -ai-u-, an" a fine of P<,***!** for the secon" cri-e!

In conicting petitioners, the RTC foun" that 9the ei"ence of the prosecutionis replete .ith situations an"1or eents to proe KpetitionersL guilt,9?? na-ely0 %a&$tien4a re>ueste" $tibula to ta8e out Volu-es (?*, (?< an" (?: of the C$ OriginalDecisions fro- the C$ Reporters Diision, .hich the latter re2ecte" "espite offer ofre-uneration %b& Volu-e (?? .as subse>uently "iscoere" to be -issing %c&access to the -issing olu-e appears to hae been ac>uire" by entering through anopening in the pre-ises of the C$s Reporters Diision because the air con"itioningunit occupying the space thereat .as ta8en out for repair earlier %"& Castroreturne" Volu-e (?? after its loss?: %e& Volu-e (?? bore ba"ges of ta-peringei"ence" by the 9non;continuity of the front an" the bac8 coer flaps an" thepages of the boo81olu-e "ifferences in the cutting -ar8s on the si"es of theolu-e an" the presence of artificial aging on KitsL si"es9?) an" %f& t.o %(& ne.

"ocu-ents .hich -aterially a-en"e" the original "ecision an" resolution in the

6ernan"o case .ere inserte" in the sai" olu-e!?+ The RTC further a""e" that the-anner by .hich petitioners co--itte" the felonious acts reeals a co--unity ofcri-inal "esign, an" thereby hel" that conspiracy eists!:*

$ggriee", petitioners appeale" their coniction to the C$!

The C$ Ruling

In a Decision:7 "ate" Noe-ber (), (**), the C$ affir-e" the RTCs 2u"g-ent ofconiction in toto! It hel" that .hile there is no "irect ei"ence sho.ing that thepetitioners co--itte" the cri-es charge", the testi-onies of $tibula an" NBI $gent$tty! Dagan4o .ith respect to .hat ha" transpire" before an" after Volu-e (?? .asta8en fro- its shelf, .hen ie.e" together .ith the other circu-stances in the case,constitute circu-stantial ei"ence .hich sufficiently point to the guilt ofpetitioners!:( In a""ition, it foun" that $tien4as "efenses .ere self;sering negatieei"ence .hich cannot out.eigh the circu-stantial ei"ence clearly establishing hisparticipation,:5 a""ing too that .hile there .as no proof of preious agree-entbet.een petitioners to unla.fully ta8e Volu-e (?? out of the office of the C$Reporters Diision an" falsify the sub2ect "ocu-ents, their conspiracy -ay beinferre" fro- the fact that Castro .as in possession of the -issing Volu-e (??.hich .as eentually "iscoere" to hae been falsifie"!:@

Fn"aunte", petitioners file" a -otion for reconsi"eration:< .hich .as, ho.eer,

"enie" in a Resolution

:?

"ate" 'uly :, (**+, hence, the instant petition!

The Issue Before the Court

The essential issue for the Courts resolution is .hether or not petitioners conictionfor the cri-es of Robbery an" 6alsification of Public Docu-ent shoul" be uphel" onaccount of the circu-stantial ei"ence in this case proing their guilt beyon"reasonable "oubt!

The Courts Ruling

The petition is -eritorious!

Circu-stantial ei"ence consists of proof of collateral facts an" circu-stances fro-.hich the -ain fact in issue -ay be inferre" base" on reason an" co--oneperience!:: It is sufficient for coniction if0 %a& there is -ore than onecircu-stance %b& the facts fro- .hich the inferences are "erie" are proen an"%c& the co-bination of all the circu-stances is such as to pro"uce a conictionbeyon" reasonable "oubt! To uphol" a coniction base" on circu-stantial ei"ence,it is essential that the circu-stantial ei"ence presente" -ust constitute anunbro8en chain .hich lea"s one to a fair an" reasonable conclusion pointing to theaccuse", to the eclusion of the others, as the guilty person! State" "ifferently, thetest to "eter-ine .hether or not the circu-stantial ei"ence on recor" is sufficientto conict the accuse" is that the series of circu-stances "uly proen -ust beconsistent .ith each other an" that each an" eery circu-stance -ust beconsistent .ith the accuse"s guilt an" inconsistent .ith his innocence!:)














































































$pplying these principles to the facts that appear on recor", the Court fin"s that nosufficient circu-stantial ei"ence .as presente" in this case to establish theele-ents of Robbery un"er $rticle (++%a&%7&:+ of the RPC an" 6alsification of PublicDocu-ents un"er $rticle 7:(%7& in relation to $rticle 7:7%?& )* of the sa-e co"e, orof petitioners suppose" conspiracy therefor!

To this en", the Court ea-ines the participation of an" ei"ence against eachpetitioner an" forth.ith eplains its reasons for reaching the foregoing conclusions!

$! The Participation of an" #i"ence $gainst Castro

Not.ithstan"ing Castros failure to refute the charges against hi-, the Court fin"sno ei"ence to lin8 hi- to the co--ission of the cri-es of Robbery an" 6alsificationof Public Docu-ent, contrary to the conclusions reache" by the RTC an" concurre"in by the C$! To begin .ith, it is essential to note that Castros purporte" possessionan" eentual return of Volu-e (?? .as only pre-ise" upon the state-ent of oneNelson "e Castro %Nelson&, i!e!, the Sinu-paang Salaysay)7 "ate" $ugust +, 7++<,.ho aerre" that on 3ay 7), 7++<, at aroun" 770<* in the -orning, Castro tol" hi-to pass by his office an" there han"e" hi- a bag .hich, as it turne" out, containe"the -issing Volu-e (??, i4!0)(

Noong 3ayo 7), 7++< ban"ang 770<* ng tanghali ay tu-a.ag sa telepono si$6R#DO C$STRO, ng Bu"get Diision, at sinabihan a8o na "u-aan sa 8anyang

opisina "ahil -ayroon "a. siyang ibibigay para sa opisina na-in! Pu-unta pona-an a8o 8aaga" 8ay $6R#DO C$STRO sa opisina at iniabot sa a8in ang isangbag na -ala8i 8ulay parang pin8 at -ay la-an at sinabihan pa niya a8o na bu8san8o na lang "a. ang bag pag"ating sa opisina! Pag"ating 8o sa opisina ay tina.ag 8osi 3r! $TIBF$ at "oon ay binu8san na-ing "ala.a ang bag! Na8ita 8o sa loob angisang bagay na na8abalot sa isang gift .rap at ng bu8san na-in o alisin ang gift.rap ay ang Original Decisions, Volu-e (?? na na.a.ala -ga ilang linggo na angna8a8araan!

Nelson .as not, ho.eer, presente" before the RTC "uring trial, hence, .as notsub2ecte" to any in;court ea-ination! It is settle" that .hile affi"aits -ay beconsi"ere" as public "ocu-ents if they are ac8no.le"ge" before a notary public%here, a public officer authori4e" to a"-inister oaths&, they are still classifie" ashearsay ei"ence unless the affiants the-seles are place" on the .itness stan" to

testify thereon an" the a"erse party is accor"e" the opportunity to cross;ea-inethe-!)5 =ith the prosecutions failure to present Nelson to affir- his state-ent thatCastro cause" the return of Volu-e (??,)@ the prosecutions ei"ence on the -attershoul" be treate" as hearsay an", thus, ina"-issible to establish the truth or falsityof the releant clai-s! Conse>uently, there eists no sufficient circu-stantialei"ence to proe Castros guilt!

B! The Participation of an" #i"ence $gainst $tien4a

In si-ilar regar", the prosecutions ei"ence on the circu-stances in this case "onot sufficiently establish $tien4as guilt for the cri-es of Robbery an" 6alsification of Public Docu-ent!

=hile recor"s sho. that $tien4a .as positiely i"entifie" by $tibula as haingatte-pte" to bribe hi- to ta8e out Volu-e (?* of the C$ Original Decisions fro-the Reporters Diision,)< the fact is that the allege" intercalation actually occurre"in a "ifferent "ocu-ent, that is Volu-e (??!

The "iscrepancy of accounts on the ery sub2ect -atter of the cri-es charge""ilutes the strength of the ei"ence re>uire" to pro"uce a coniction! $t best, thebribery atte-pt -ay be "ee-e" as a "e-onstration of interest on the part of$tien4a oer sai" sub2ect -atter an" in this regar", constitutes proof of -otie!Ho.eer, it is .ell;establishe" that -ere proof of -otie, no -atter ho. strong, isnot sufficient to support a coniction, -ost especially if there is no other reliableei"ence fro- .hich it -ay reasonably be "e"uce" that the accuse" .as the-alefactor!)?

In fact, een if $tien4as bribery atte-pt is ta8en together .ith the othercircu-stance couche" as a releant lin8 by the prosecution in this case i!e!, hisaerre" encounter .ith $tibula, on 3ay 77, 7++<, or t.o %(& "ays after the"iscoery of the loss of Volu-e (??, .herein the latter uttere"

9KpLutang ina -o, 'uaning, pinahirapan -o 8a-i9): the Court still fin"s theei"ence to be lac8ing! This allegation, een if proen as true, "oes not in"icate that$tien4a ho.soeer affir-e" the ta8ing or een the falsification of Volu-e (??!Clearly, the utterance .as -a"e by $tibula .ho "i" not bother to state $tien4asresponse thereto or any other subse>uent action connecte" there.ith so as to

bolster a fin"ing of guilt! Neither can this circu-stance be properly lin8e" to the actof Castro initing $tibula to $tien4as party! It .oul" be a stretch to conclu"e thatthis -ere initation, .ithout any other proof of Castros participation, .asinstru-ental or, at the ery least, reasonably connecte" to $tien4a an" his o.nallege" participation in the aboe;state" cri-es!

In this relation, it -ay not be a-iss to "ebun8 the clai- that petitioners conspire"in this case!1âwphi1 =hile "irect proof is not essential to establish conspiracy as it-ay be inferre" fro- the collectie acts of the accuse" before, "uring an" after theco--ission of the cri-e .hich point to a 2oint purpose, "esign, concerte" action,an" co--unity of interests,)) recor"s are, ho.eer, bereft of any sho.ing as to ho.the particular acts of petitioners figure" into the co--on "esign of ta8ing out thesub2ect olu-e an" inserting the falsifie" "ocu-ents therein! Hence, theprosecutions theory of conspiracy "oes not "esere any -erit!

$ll tol", the prosecution has faile" to sho. that the circu-stances ino8e"constitute an unbro8en chain of eents .hich lea" to a fair an" reasonableconclusion that petitioners are, to the eclusion of the others, in"ee" the culprits! $ssuch, their coniction, teste" un"er the threshol" of proof beyon" reasonable "oubt,.as not .arrante"! To be sure, proof beyon" reasonable "oubt is the "egree ofproof that, after inestigation of the .hole recor", pro"uces -oral certainty in anunpre2u"ice" -in" of the accuse"s culpability!)+ Such -oral certainty is, ho.eer,lac8ing in this case "ue to the insufficiency of the circu-stantial ei"encepresente"!

C! 'uris"ictional Defect0 6alsification Case

l b h h C " " h " 8




























$lso, it bears -entioning that the RTC "i" not hae 2uris"iction to ta8e cogni4anceof Cri-inal Case No! *7;7+:@(? %i!e!, the falsification case& since 6alsification ofPublic Docu-ent un"er $rticle 7:(%7&+* of the RPC, .hich is punishable by prisioncorreccional in its -e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s %or i-prison-ent for ( years, @-onths an" 7 "ay to ? years+7& an" a fine of not -ore than P<,***!**, falls .ithinthe eclusie 2uris"iction of the 3etropolitan Trial Courts, 3unicipal Trial Courts an"3unicipal Circuit Trial Courts pursuant to Section 5(%(&+( of Batas Pa-bansa Bilang7(+,+5 other.ise 8no.n as the 9'u"iciary Reorgani4ation $ct of 7+)*,9 as a-en"e"by R$ :?+7!+@=hile petitioners raise" this 2uris"ictional "efect+< for the first ti-e inthe present petition, they are not preclu"e" fro- >uestioning the sa-e! In"ee", 2uris"iction oer the sub2ect -atter is conferre" only by the Constitution or the la.

an" cannot be ac>uire" through a .aier or enlarge" by the o-ission of the partiesor conferre" by the ac>uiescence of the court! The rule is .ell;settle" that lac8 of 2uris"iction oer the sub2ect -atter -ay be raise" at any stage of the procee"ings!Hence, >uestions of 2uris"iction -ay be cogni4able een if raise" for the first ti-eon appeal!+?

D! $ 6inal =or"

The Constitution -an"ates that an accuse" shall be presu-e" innocent until thecontrary is proen beyon" reasonable "oubt! The bur"en lies on the prosecution tooerco-e such presu-ption of innocence, failing .hich, the presu-ption ofinnocence preails an" the accuse" shoul" be ac>uitte"!+: This, "espite the fact thathis innocence -ay be "oubte", for a cri-inal coniction rests on the strength of the

ei"ence of the prosecution an" not on the .ea8ness or een absence of "efense! If the inculpatory facts an" circu-stances are capable of t.o or -ore eplanations,one of .hich is consistent .ith the innocence of the accuse" an" the otherconsistent .ith his guilt, then the e i"ence "oes not fulfill the test of -oral certaintyan" is not sufficient to support a coniction, as in this case! Courts shoul" be gui"e"by the principle that it .oul" be better to set free ten -en .ho -ight be probablyguilty of the cri-e charge" than to conict one innocent -an for a cri-e he "i" notco--it!+)

$ccor"ingly, there being no circu-stantial ei"ence sufficient to support aconiction, the Court hereby ac>uits petitioners, .ithout pre2u"ice, ho.eer, to anysubse>uent fin"ing on their a"-inistratie liability in connection .ith the inci"entsin this case!

=H#R#6OR#, the petition is /R$NT#D! The Decision "ate" Noe-ber (), (**) ofthe Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR! No! 5*?<* is R#V#RS#D an" S#T $SID#!Petitioners Ricar"o ! $tien4a an" $lfre"o $! Castro are hereby $CJFITT#D of thecri-es of Robbery an" 6alsification of Public Docu-ent on the groun" of reasonable"oubt, .ithout pre2u"ice to any subse>uent fin"ing on their a"-inistratie liability inconnection .ith the inci"ents in this case! The bail bon"s poste" for their proisionalliberty are conse>uently cancelle" an" release"!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

Baguio City

#N B$NC

G.R. No. 10016 April 2*, 2014

LITO CORPU#, Petitioner,

s!


D # C I S I O N f " t t th i" it t it th t f Ni t #i ht Th "





















D # C I S I O N

PERALTA, J.:

This is to resole the Petition for Reie. on Certiorari, un"er Rule @< of the Rules of

Court, "ate" Noe-ber <, (**:, of petitioner ito Corpu4 %petitioner&, see8ing to

reerse an" set asi"e the Decision7 "ate" 3arch ((, (**: an" Resolution( "ate"

Septe-ber <, (**: of the Court of $ppeals %C$&, .hich affir-e" .ith -o"ification

the Decision5 "ate" 'uly 5*, (**@ of the Regional Trial Court %RTC&, Branch @?, San

6ernan"o City, fin"ing the petitioner guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-e of#stafa un"er $rticle 57<, paragraph %7&, sub;paragraph %b& of the Reise" Penal

Co"e!

The antece"ent facts follo.!

Priate co-plainant Danilo Tangcoy an" petitioner -et at the $"-iral Royale Casino

in Olongapo City so-eti-e in 7++*! Priate co-plainant .as then engage" in the

business of len"ing -oney to casino players an", upon hearing that the for-er ha"

so-e pieces of 2e.elry for sale, petitioner approache" hi- on 3ay (, 7++7 at the

sa-e casino an" offere" to sell the sai" pieces of 2e.elry on co--ission basis!

Priate co-plainant agree", an" as a conse>uence, he turne" oer to petitioner the

follo.ing ite-s0 an 7)8 "ia-on" ring for -en a .o-anAs bracelet one %7& -enAsnec8lace an" another -enAs bracelet, .ith an aggregate alue of P+),***!**, as

ei"ence" by a receipt of een "ate! They both agree" that petitioner shall re-it

the procee"s of the sale, an"1or, if unsol", to return the sa-e ite-s, .ithin a perio"

of ?* "ays! The perio" epire" .ithout petitioner re-itting the procee"s of the sale

or returning the pieces of 2e.elry! =hen priate co-plainant .as able to -eet

petitioner, the latter pro-ise" the for-er that he .ill pay the alue of the sai" ite-s

entruste" to hi-, but to no aail!

Thus, an Infor-ation .as file" against petitioner for the cri-e of estafa, .hich

rea"s as follo.s0

That on or about the fifth %<th& "ay of 'uly 7++7, in the City of Olongapo,Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e"

accuse", after haing receie" fro- one Danilo Tangcoy, one %7& -enAs "ia-on"

ring, 7)8, .orth P@<,***!** one %7& three;baht -enAs bracelet, ((8,

.orth P(<,***!** one %7& t.o;baht la"iesA bracelet, ((8, .orth P7(,***!**, or in

the total a-ount of Ninety;#ight Thousan" Pesos %P+),***!**&, Philippine currency,

un"er epresse" obligation on the part of sai" accuse" to re-it the procee"s of the

sale of the sai" ite-s or to return the sa-e, if not sol", sai" accuse", once in

possession of the sai" ite-s, .ith intent to "efrau", an" .ith unfaithfulness an"

abuse of confi"ence, an" far fro- co-plying .ith his aforestate" obligation, "i"

then an" there .ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously -isappropriate, -isapply an"

conert to his o.n personal use an" benefit the aforesai" 2e.elries %sic& or the

procee"s of the sale thereof, an" "espite repeate" "e-an"s, the accuse" faile" an"

refuse" to return the sai" ite-s or to re-it the a-ount of Ninety; #ight Thousan"

Pesos %P+),***!**&, Philippine currency, to the "a-age an" pre2u"ice of sai" Danilo

Tangcoy in the afore-entione" a-ount!

CONTR$RG TO $=!

On 'anuary (), 7++(, petitioner, .ith the assistance of his counsel, entere" a plea

of not guilty! Thereafter, trial on the -erits ensue"!

The prosecution, to proe the aboe;state" facts, presente" the lone testi-ony ofDanilo Tangcoy! On the other han", the "efense presente" the lone testi-ony of

petitioner, .hich can be su--ari4e", as follo.s0

Petitioner an" priate co-plainant .ere collecting agents of $ntonio Bala2a"ia, .ho

is engage" in the financing business of eten"ing loans to Base e-ployees! 6or

eery collection -a"e, they earn a co--ission! Petitioner "enie" haing transacte"

any business .ith priate co-plainant!

Ho.eer, he a"-itte" obtaining a loan fro- Bala2a"ia so-eti-e in 7+)+ for .hich

he .as -a"e to sign a blan8 receipt! He clai-e" that the sa-e receipt .as then

"ate" 3ay (, 7++7 an" use" as ei"ence against hi- for the suppose" agree-ent

to sell the sub2ect pieces of 2e.elry, .hich he "i" not een see!

$fter trial, the RTC foun" petitioner guilty beyon" reasonable "oubt of the cri-e

charge" in the Infor-ation! The "ispositie portion of the "ecision states0

=H#R#6OR#, fin"ing accuse" ITO CORPFQ /FITG beyon" reasonable "oubt of the

felony of #stafa un"er $rticle 57<, paragraph one %7&, subparagraph %b& of the

Reise" Penal Co"e

there being no offsetting generic aggraating nor or"inary -itigating circu-stance1s

to ary the penalty i-posable

accor"ingly, the accuse" is hereby sentence" to suffer the penalty of "epriation of

liberty consisting of an i-prison-ent un"er the In"eter-inate Sentence a. of

6OFR %@& G#$RS $ND T=O %(& 3ONTHS of Prision Correccional in its -e"iu- perio"

$S 3INI3F3, to 6OFRT##N %7@& G#$RS $ND #I/HT %)& 3ONTHS of Reclusion

Te-poral in its -ini-u- perio" $S 3$I3F3 to in"e-nify priate co-plainant

Danilo Tangcoy the a-ount of P+),***!** as actual "a-ages, an" to pay the costs

of suit!

SO ORD#R#D!

The case .as eleate" to the C$, ho.eer, the latter "enie" the appeal of petitioner

an" affir-e" the "ecision of the RTC, thus0

=H#R#6OR# the instant appeal is D#NI#D The assaile" ' "g-ent "ate" ' l 5* ( TH# V#RSION O6 TH# P#TITION#R $CCFS#D IS 3OR#











=H#R#6OR#, the instant appeal is D#NI#D! The assaile" 'u"g-ent "ate" 'uly 5*,

(**@ of the RTC of San 6ernan"o City %P&, Branch @?, is hereby $66IR3#D .ith

3ODI6IC$TION on the i-posable prison ter-, such that accuse";appellant shall

suffer the in"eter-inate penalty of @ years an" ( -onths of prision correccional, as

-ini-u-, to ) years of prision -ayor, as -ai-u-, plus 7 year for each

a""itional P7*,***!**, or a total of : years! The rest of the "ecision stan"s!

SO ORD#R#D!

Petitioner, after the C$ "enie" his -otion for reconsi"eration, file" .ith this Courtthe present petition stating the follo.ing groun"s0

$! TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN CON6IR3IN/ TH# $D3ISSION

$ND $PPR#CI$TION BG TH# O=#R COFRT O6 PROS#CFTION #VID#NC#,

INCFDIN/ ITS #HIBITS, =HICH $R# 3#R# 3$CHIN# COPI#S, $S THIS VIO$T#S

TH# B#ST #VID#NC# RF#

B! TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN $66IR3IN/ TH# O=#R

COFRTAS 6INDIN/ TH$T TH# CRI3IN$ IN6OR3$TION 6OR #ST$6$ =$S NOT

6$T$G D#6#CTIV# $THOF/H TH# S$3# DID NOT CH$R/# TH# O66#NS# FND#R

$RTIC# 57< %7& %B& O6 TH# R#VIS#D P#N$ COD# IN TH$T ;

7! TH# IN6OR3$TION DID NOT 6I $ P#RIOD =ITHIN =HICH TH#

SFB'#CT KPI#C#S O6L '#=#RG SHOFD B# R#TFRN#D, I6 FNSOD, OR

TH# 3ON#G TO B# R#3ITT#D, I6 SOD

(! TH# D$T# O6 TH# OCCFRR#NC# O6 TH# CRI3# $#/#D IN TH#

IN6OR3$TION $S O6 *< 'FG 7++7 =$S 3$T#RI$G DI66#R#NT 6RO3

TH# ON# T#STI6I#D TO BG TH# PRIV$T# CO3P$IN$NT =HICH =$S *(

3$G 7++7

C! TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN $66IR3IN/ TH# O=#R

COFRTAS 6INDIN/ TH$T D#3$ND TO R#TFRN TH# SFB'#CT KPI#C#S O6L '#=#RG,

I6 FNSOD, OR R#3IT TH# PROC##DS, I6 SOD $N ##3#NT O6 TH# O66#NS#

=$S PROV#D

D! TH# HONOR$B# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN $66IR3IN/ TH# O=#R

COFRTAS 6INDIN/ TH$T TH# PROS#CFTIONAS C$S# =$S PROV#N B#GOND

R#$SON$B# DOFBT $THOF/H ;

7! TH# PRIV$T# CO3P$IN$NT T#STI6I#D ON T=O %(& V#RSIONS O6 TH#

INCID#NT

(! TH# V#RSION O6 TH# P#TITION#R $CCFS#D IS 3OR#

STR$I/HT6OR=$RD $ND O/IC$, CONSIST#NT =ITH HF3$N

#P#RI#NC#

5! TH# #JFIPOIS# RF# =$S NOT $PPR#CI$T#D IN $ND $PPI#D TO THIS

C$S#

@! P#N$ ST$TFT#S $R# STRICTG CONSTRF#D $/$INST TH# ST$T#!

In its Co--ent "ate" 3ay <, (**), the Office of the Solicitor /eneral %OS/& state"the follo.ing counter;argu-ents0

The ehibits .ere properly a"-itte" inas-uch as petitioner faile" to ob2ect to their

a"-issibility!

The infor-ation .as not "efectie inas-uch as it sufficiently establishe" the

"esignation of the offense an" the acts co-plaine" of!

The prosecution sufficiently establishe" all the ele-ents of the cri-e charge"!

This Court fin"s the present petition "eoi" of any -erit!

The factual fin"ings of the appellate court generally are conclusie, an" carry een

-ore .eight .hen sai" court affir-s the fin"ings of the trial court, absent any

sho.ing that the fin"ings are totally "eoi" of support in the recor"s, or that they

are so glaringly erroneous as to constitute grae abuse of "iscretion!@ Petitioner is of

the opinion that the C$ erre" in affir-ing the factual fin"ings of the trial court! He

no. co-es to this Court raising both proce"ural an" substantie issues!

$ccor"ing to petitioner, the C$ erre" in affir-ing the ruling of the trial court,

a"-itting in ei"ence a receipt "ate" 3ay (, 7++7 -ar8e" as #hibit 9$9 an" its

sub-ar8ings, although the sa-e .as -erely a photocopy, thus, iolating the best

ei"ence rule! Ho.eer, the recor"s sho. that petitioner neer ob2ecte" to thea"-issibility of the sai" ei"ence at the ti-e it .as i"entifie", -ar8e" an" testifie"

upon in court by priate co-plainant! The C$ also correctly pointe" out that

petitioner also faile" to raise an ob2ection in his Co--ent to the prosecutionAs

for-al offer of ei"ence an" een a"-itte" haing signe" the sai" receipt! The

establishe" "octrine is that .hen a party faile" to interpose a ti-ely ob2ection to

ei"ence at the ti-e they .ere offere" in ei"ence, such ob2ection shall be

consi"ere" as .aie"!<

$nother proce"ural issue raise" is, as clai-e" by petitioner, the for-ally "efectie

Infor-ation file" against hi-! He conten"s that the Infor-ation "oes not contain

the perio" .hen the pieces of 2e.elry .ere suppose" to be returne" an" that the

"ate .hen the cri-e occurre" .as "ifferent fro- the one testifie" to by priate

co-plainant This argu-ent is untenable The C$ "i" not err in fin"ing that the for a"-inistration or un"er any other obligation inoling the "uty to -a8e "eliery







co-plainant! This argu-ent is untenable! The C$ "i" not err in fin"ing that the

Infor-ation .as substantially co-plete an" in reiterating that ob2ections as to the

-atters of for- an" substance in the Infor-ation cannot be -a"e for the first ti-e

on appeal! It is true that the graa-en of the cri-e of estafa un"er $rticle 57<,

paragraph 7, subparagraph %b& of the RPC is the appropriation or conersion of

-oney or property receie" to the pre2u"ice of the o.ner? an" that the ti-e of

occurrence is not a -aterial ingre"ient of the cri-e, hence, the eclusion of the

perio" an" the .rong "ate of the occurrence of the cri-e, as reflecte" in the

Infor-ation, "o not -a8e the latter fatally "efectie! The C$ rule"0

$n infor-ation is legally iable as long as it "istinctly states the statutory

"esignation of the offense an" the acts or o-issions constitutie thereof! Then

Section ?, Rule 77* of the Rules of Court proi"es that a co-plaint or infor-ation is

sufficient if it states the na-e of the accuse"

the "esignation of the offense by the statute the acts or o-issions co-plaine" of

as constituting the offense the na-e of the offen"e" party the approi-ate ti-e

of the co--ission of the offense, an" the place .herein the offense .as co--itte"!

In the case at bar, a rea"ing of the sub2ect Infor-ation sho.s co-pliance .ith the

foregoing rule! That the ti-e of the co--ission of the offense .as state" as 9 on or

about the fifth %<th& "ay of 'uly, 7++79 is not li8e.ise fatal to the prosecutionAs

cause consi"ering that Section 77 of the sa-e Rule re>uires a state-ent of the

precise ti-e only .hen the sa-e is a -aterial ingre"ient of the offense! The

graa-en of the cri-e of estafa un"er $rticle 57<, paragraph 7 %b& of the Reise"

Penal Co"e %RPC& is the appropriation or conersion of -oney or property receie"

to the pre2u"ice of the offen"er! Thus, asi"e fro- the fact that the "ate of the

co--ission thereof is not an essential ele-ent of the cri-e herein charge", the

failure of the prosecution to specify the eact "ate "oes not ren"er the Infor-ation

ipso facto "efectie! 3oreoer, the sai" "ate is also near the "ue "ate .ithin .hich

accuse";appellant shoul" hae "eliere" the procee"s or returne" the sai" Kpieces

of 2e.elryL as testifie" upon by Tang8oy, hence, there .as sufficient co-pliance .ith

the rules! $ccuse";appellant, therefore, cannot no. be allo.e" to clai- that he .as

not properly apprise" of the charges proferre" against hi-!:

It -ust be re-e-bere" that petitioner .as conicte" of the cri-e of #stafa un"er

$rticle 57<, paragraph 7 %b& of the RPC, .hich rea"s0

$RT! 57<! S.in"ling %estafa&! $ny person .ho shall "efrau" another by any of the

-eans -entione" hereinbelo.!

7! =ith unfaithfulness or abuse of confi"ence, na-ely0

%b& By -isappropriating or conerting, to the pre2u"ice of another, -oney, goo"s, or

any other personal property receie" by the offen"er in trust or on co--ission, or

for a"-inistration, or un"er any other obligation inoling the "uty to -a8e "eliery

of or to return the sa-e, een though such obligation be totally or partially

guarantee" by a bon" or by "enying haing receie" such -oney, goo"s, or other

property

The ele-ents of estafa .ith abuse of confi"ence are as follo.s0 %a& that -oney,

goo"s or other personal property is receie" by the offen"er in trust, or on

co--ission, or for a"-inistration, or un"er any other obligation inoling the "uty

to -a8e "eliery of, or to return the sa-e %b& that there be -isappropriation or

conersion of such -oney or property by the offen"er or "enial on his part of suchreceipt %c& that such -isappropriation or conersion or "enial is to the pre2u"ice of

another an" %"& that there is a "e-an" -a"e by the offen"e" party on the

offen"er!)

Petitioner argues that the last ele-ent, .hich is, that there is a "e-an" by the

offen"e" party on the offen"er, .as not proe"! This Court "isagrees! In his

testi-ony, priate co-plainant narrate" ho. he .as able to locate petitioner after

al-ost t.o %(& -onths fro- the ti-e he gae the pieces of 2e.elry an" as8e"

petitioner about the sa-e ite-s .ith the latter pro-ising to pay the-! Thus0

PROS! 3$RTIN#Q

> No., 3r! =itness, this .as eecute" on ( 3ay 7++7, an" this transaction coul"

hae been finishe" on < 'uly 7++7, the >uestion is .hat happens %sic& .hen the

"ea"line ca-e

a I .ent loo8ing for hi-, sir!

> 6or .ho-

a ito Corpu4, sir!

> =ere you able to loo8 %sic& for hi-

a I loo8e" for hi- for a .ee8, sir!

> Di" you 8no. his resi"ence

a Ges, sir!

> Di" you go there

a Ges, sir!

> Di" you fin" hi- In Tubb People .here the co-plainant -erely erbally in>uire" about the -oney










> Di" you fin" hi-

a No, sir!

> =ere you able to tal8 to hi- since < 'uly 7++7

a I tal8e" to hi-, sir!

> Ho. -any ti-es

a T.o ti-es, sir!

> =hat "i" you tal8 %sic& to hi-

a $bout the ite-s I gae to %sic& hi-, sir!

> Referring to #hibit $;(

a Ges, sir, an" accor"ing to hi- he .ill ta8e his obligation an" I as8e" hi- .here

the ite-s are an" he pro-ise" -e that he .ill pay these a-ount, sir!

> Fp to this ti-e that you .ere here, .ere you able to collect fro- hi- partially or

full

a No, sir!+

No specific type of proof is re>uire" to sho. that there .as "e-an"!7* De-an" nee"

not een be for-al it -ay be erbal!77 The specific .or" 9"e-an"9 nee" not een

be use" to sho. that it has in"ee" been -a"e upon the person charge", since een

a -ere >uery as to the .hereabouts of the -oney Kin this case, propertyL, .oul" be

tanta-ount to a "e-an"!7( $s epoun"e" in $se2o ! People075

=ith regar" to the necessity of "e-an", .e agree .ith the C$ that "e-an" un"er

this 8in" of estafa nee" not be for-al or .ritten! The appellate court obsere" that

the la. is silent .ith regar" to the for- of "e-an" in estafa un"er $rt! 57< 7%b&,

thus0

=hen the la. "oes not >ualify, =e shoul" not >ualify! Shoul" a .ritten "e-an" be

necessary, the la. .oul" hae state" so! Other.ise, the .or" 9"e-an"9 shoul" be

interprete" in its general -eaning as to inclu"e both .ritten an" oral "e-an"! Thus,

the failure of the prosecution to present a .ritten "e-an" as ei"ence is not fatal!

In Tubb ! People, .here the co-plainant -erely erbally in>uire" about the -oney

entruste" to the accuse", .e hel" that the >uery .as tanta-ount to a "e-an",

thus0

KTLhe la. "oes not re>uire a "e-an" as a con"ition prece"ent to the eistence

of the cri-e of e-be44le-ent! It so happens only that failure to account, upon

"e-an" for fun"s or property hel" in trust, is circu-stantial ei"ence of

-isappropriation! The sa-e .ay, ho.eer, be establishe" by other proof, such as

that intro"uce" in the case at bar!7@

In ie. of the foregoing an" base" on the recor"s, the prosecution .as able to

proe the eistence of all the ele-ents of the cri-e! Priate co-plainant gae

petitioner the pieces of 2e.elry in trust, or on co--ission basis, as sho.n in the

receipt "ate" 3ay (, 7++7 .ith an obligation to sell or return the sa-e .ithin sity

%?*& "ays, if unsol"! There .as -isappropriation .hen petitioner faile" to re-it the

procee"s of those pieces of 2e.elry sol", or if no sale too8 place, faile" to return the

sa-e pieces of 2e.elry .ithin or after the agree" perio" "espite "e-an" fro- the

priate co-plainant, to the pre2u"ice of the latter!

$nent the cre"ibility of the prosecutionAs sole .itness, .hich is >uestione" by

petitioner, the sa-e is un-eritorious! Settle" is the rule that in assessing the

cre"ibility of .itnesses, this Court gies great respect to the ealuation of the trialcourt for it ha" the uni>ue opportunity to obsere the "e-eanor of .itnesses an"

their "eport-ent on the .itness stan", an opportunity "enie" the appellate courts,

.hich -erely rely on the recor"s of the case!7< The assess-ent by the trial court is

een conclusie an" bin"ing if not tainte" .ith arbitrariness or oersight of so-e

fact or circu-stance of .eight an" influence, especially .hen such fin"ing is

affir-e" by the C$!7? Truth is establishe" not by the nu-ber of .itnesses, but by

the >uality of their testi-onies, for in "eter-ining the alue an" cre"ibility of

ei"ence, the .itnesses are to be .eighe" not nu-bere"!7:

$s regar"s the penalty, .hile this CourtAs Thir" Diision .as "eliberating on this

case, the >uestion of the continue" ali"ity of i-posing on persons conicte" of

cri-es inoling property ca-e up! The legislature apparently pegge" these

penalties to the alue of the -oney an" property in 7+5* .hen it enacte" the

Reise" Penal Co"e! Since the -e-bers of the "iision reache" no unani-ity on this

>uestion an" since the issues are of first i-pression, they "eci"e" to refer the case

to the Court en banc for consi"eration an" resolution! Thus, seeral a-ici curiae

.ere inite" at the behest of the Court to gie their aca"e-ic opinions on the

-atter! $-ong those that graciously co-plie" .ere Dean 'ose 3anuel Dio8no, Dean

Se"frey 3! Can"elaria, Professor $lfre"o 6! Ta"iar, the Senate Presi"ent, an" the

Spea8er of the House of Representaties! The parties .ere later hear" on oral

argu-ents before the Court en banc, .ith $tty! 3ario ! Bautista appearing as

counsel "e oficio of the petitioner!

$fter a thorough consi"eration of the argu-ents presente" on the -atter, this Court

fin"s the follo.ing0

There see-s to be a perceie" in2ustice brought about by the range of penalties This proision is base" un"er the legal -ai- 9nullu- cri-en nulla poena sige


























There see-s to be a perceie" in2ustice brought about by the range of penalties

that the courts continue to i-pose on cri-es against property co--itte" to"ay,

base" on the a-ount of "a-age -easure" by the alue of -oney eighty years ago

in 7+5(! Ho.eer, this Court cannot -o"ify the sai" range of penalties because that

.oul" constitute 2u"icial legislation! =hat the legislatureAs perceie" failure in

a-en"ing the penalties proi"e" for in the sai" cri-es cannot be re-e"ie" through

this CourtAs "ecisions, as that .oul" be encroaching upon the po.er of another

branch of the goern-ent! This, ho.eer, "oes not ren"er the .hole situation

.ithout any re-e"y! It can be appropriately presu-e" that the fra-ers of the

Reise" Penal Co"e %RPC& ha" anticipate" this -atter by inclu"ing $rticle <, .hich

rea"s0

$RT! <! Duty of the court in connection .ith acts .hich shoul" be represse" but

.hich are not coere" by the la., an" in cases of ecessie penalties! ; =heneer a

court has 8no.le"ge of any act .hich it -ay "ee- proper to repress an" .hich is

not punishable by la., it shall ren"er the proper "ecision, an" shall report to the

Chief #ecutie, through the Depart-ent of 'ustice, the reasons .hich in"uce the

court to beliee that sai" act shoul" be -a"e the sub2ect of penal legislation!

In the sa-e .ay, the court shall sub-it to the Chief #ecutie, through the

Depart-ent of 'ustice, such state-ent as -ay be "ee-e" proper, .ithout

suspen"ing the eecution of the sentence, .hen a strict enforce-ent of the

proisions of this Co"e .oul" result in the i-position of a clearly ecessie penalty,

ta8ing into consi"eration the "egree of -alice an" the in2ury cause" by the

offense!7)

The first paragraph of the aboe proision clearly states that for acts bourne out of

a case .hich is not punishable by la. an" the court fin"s it proper to repress, the

re-e"y is to ren"er the proper "ecision an" thereafter, report to the Chief

#ecutie, through the Depart-ent of 'ustice, the reasons .hy the sa-e act shoul"

be the sub2ect of penal legislation! The pre-ise here is that a "eplorable act is

present but is not the sub2ect of any penal legislation, thus, the court is tas8e" to

infor- the Chief #ecutie of the nee" to -a8e that act punishable by la. through

legislation! The secon" paragraph is si-ilar to the f irst ecept for the situation

.herein the act is alrea"y punishable by la. but the correspon"ing penalty is

"ee-e" by the court as ecessie! The re-e"y therefore, as in the first paragraph

is not to suspen" the eecution of the sentence but to sub-it to the Chief #ecutie

the reasons .hy the court consi"ers the sai" penalty to be non;co--ensurate .ith

the act co--itte"! $gain, the court is tas8e" to infor- the Chief #ecutie, this

ti-e, of the nee" for a legislation to proi"e the proper penalty!

In his boo8, Co--entaries on the Reise" Penal Co"e,7+ /uiller-o B! /ueara

opine" that in $rticle <, the "uty of the court is -erely to report to the Chief

#ecutie, .ith a reco--en"ation for an a-en"-ent or -o"ification of the legal

proisions .hich it beliees to be harsh! Thus0

This proision is base" un"er the legal -ai- nullu- cri-en, nulla poena sige

lege,9 that is, that there can e ist no punishable act ecept those preiously an"

specifically proi"e" for by penal statute!

No -atter ho. reprehensible an act is, if the la.;-a8ing bo"y "oes not "ee- it

necessary to prohibit its perpetration .ith penal sanction, the Court of 2ustice .ill be

entirely po.erless to punish such act!

Fn"er the proisions of this article the Court cannot suspen" the eecution of a

sentence on the groun" that the strict enforce-ent of the proisions of this Co"e.oul" cause ecessie or harsh penalty! $ll that the Court coul" "o in such

eentuality is to report the -atter to the Chief #ecutie .ith a reco--en"ation for

an a-en"-ent or -o"ification of the legal proisions .hich it beliees to be harsh!(*

$nent the non;suspension of the eecution of the sentence, retire" Chief 'ustice

Ra-on C! $>uino an" retire" $ssociate 'ustice Carolina C! /rio;$>uino, in their

boo8, The Reise" Penal Co"e,(7 echoe" the aboe;cite" co--entary, thus0

The secon" paragraph of $rt! < is an application of the hu-anitarian principle that

2ustice -ust be te-pere" .ith -ercy! /enerally, the courts hae nothing to "o .ith

the .is"o- or 2ustness of the penalties fie" by la.! 9=hether or not the penalties

prescribe" by la. upon coniction of iolations of particular statutes are too seereor are not seere enough, are >uestions as to .hich co--entators on the la. -ay

fairly "iffer but it is the "uty of the courts to enforce the .ill of the legislator in all

cases unless it clearly appears that a gien penalty falls .ithin the prohibite" class

of ecessie fines or cruel an" unusual punish-ent!9 $ petition for cle-ency shoul"

be a""resse" to the Chief #ecutie!((

There is an opinion that the penalties proi"e" for in cri-es against property be

base" on the current inflation rate or at the ratio of P7!** is e>ual to P7**!** !

Ho.eer, it .oul" be "angerous as this .oul" result in uncertainties, as oppose" to

the "efinite i-position of the penalties! It -ust be re-e-bere" that the econo-y

fluctuates an" if the propose" i-position of the penalties in cri-es against property

be a"opte", the penalties .ill not cease to change, thus, -a8ing the RPC, a self;a-en"ing la.! Ha" the fra-ers of the RPC inten"e" that to be so, it shoul" hae

proi"e" the sa-e, instea", it inclu"e" the earlier cite" $rticle < as a re-e"y! It is

also i-proper to presu-e .hy the present legislature has not -a"e any -oes to

a-en" the sub2ect penalties in or"er to confor- .ith the present ti-es! 6or all .e

8no., the legislature inten"s to retain the sa-e penalties in or"er to "eter the

further co--ission of those punishable acts .hich hae increase" tre-en"ously

through the years! In fact, in recent -oes of the legislature, it is apparent that it

ai-s to broa"en the coerage of those .ho iolate penal la.s! In the cri-e of

Plun"er, fro- its original -ini-u- a-ount of P7**,***,***!** plun"ere", the

legislature lo.ere" it toP<*,***,***!**! In the sa-e .ay, the legislature lo.ere"

the threshol" a-ount upon .hich the $nti;3oney aun"ering $ct -ay apply,

fro- P7,***,***!** to P<**,***!**!

It is also .orth noting that in the cri-es of Theft an" #stafa the present penalties In a case .herein the alue of the thing stolen is P? *** ** the aboe;proision














It is also .orth noting that in the cri-es of Theft an" #stafa, the present penalties

"o not see- to be ecessie co-pare" to the propose" i-position of their

correspon"ing penalties! In Theft, the proisions state that0

$rt! 5*+! Penalties! $ny person guilty of theft shall be punishe" by0

7! The penalty of prision -ayor in its -ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s, if the

alue of the thing stolen is -ore than 7(,*** pesos but "oes not ecee"

((,*** pesos, but if the alue of the thing stolen ecee"s the latter

a-ount the penalty shall be the -ai-u- perio" of the one prescribe" inthis paragraph, an" one year for each a""itional ten thousan" pesos, but

the total of the penalty .hich -ay be i-pose" shall not ecee" t.enty

years! In such cases, an" in connection .ith the accessory penalties .hich

-ay be i-pose" an" for the purpose of the other proisions of this Co"e,

the penalty shall be ter-e" prision -ayor or reclusion te-poral, as the

case -ay be!

(! The penalty of prision correccional in its -e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s,

if the alue of the thing stolen is -ore than ?,*** pesos but "oes not

ecee" 7(,*** pesos!

5! The penalty of prision correccional in its -ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s,if the alue of the property stolen is -ore than (** pesos but "oes not

ecee" ?,*** pesos!

@! $rresto -ayor in its -e"iu- perio" to prision correccional in its

-ini-u- perio", if the alue of the property stolen is oer <* pesos but

"oes not ecee" (** pesos!

<! $rresto -ayor to its full etent, if such alue is oer < pesos but "oes

not ecee" <* pesos!

?! $rresto -ayor in its -ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s, if such alue "oes

not ecee" < pesos!

:! $rresto -enor or a fine not ecee"ing (** pesos, if the theft is

co--itte" un"er the circu-stances enu-erate" in paragraph 5 of the net

prece"ing article an" the alue of the thing stolen "oes not ecee" <

pesos! If such alue ecee"s sai" a-ount, the proision of any of the fie

prece"ing sub"iisions shall be -a"e applicable!

)! $rresto -enor in its -ini-u- perio" or a fine not ecee"ing <* pesos,

.hen the alue of the thing stolen is not oer < pesos, an" the offen"er

shall hae acte" un"er the i-pulse of hunger, poerty, or the "ifficulty of

earning a lielihoo" for the support of hi-self or his fa-ily!

In a case .herein the alue of the thing stolen is P?,***!**, the aboe proision

states that the penalty is prision correccional in its -ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s %?

-onths an" 7 "ay to @ years an" ( -onths&! $pplying the proposal, if the alue of

the thing stolen is P?,***!**, the penalty is i-prison-ent of arresto -ayor in its

-e"iu- perio" to prision correccional -ini-u- perio" %( -onths an" 7 "ay to (

years an" @ -onths&! It .oul" see- that un"er the present la., the penalty

i-pose" is al-ost the sa-e as the penalty propose"! In fact, after the application of

the In"eter-inate Sentence a. un"er the eisting la., the -ini-u- penalty is still

lo.ere" by one "egree hence, the -ini-u- penalty is arresto -ayor in its -e"iu-

perio" to -ai-u- perio" %( -onths an" 7 "ay to ? -onths&, -a8ing the offen"er

>ualifie" for par"on or parole after sering the sai" -ini-u- perio" an" -ay een

apply for probation! 3oreoer, un"er the proposal, the -ini-u- penalty after

applying the In"eter-inate Sentence a. is arresto -enor in its -ai-u- perio" to

arresto -ayor in its -ini-u- perio" %(7 "ays to ( -onths& is not too far fro- the

-ini-u- perio" un"er the eisting la.! Thus, it .oul" see- that the present

penalty i-pose" un"er the la. is not at all ecessie! The sa-e is also true in the

cri-e of #stafa!(5

3oreoer, if .e apply the ratio of 707**, as suggeste" to the alue of the thing

stolen in the cri-e of Theft an" the "a-age cause" in the cri-e of #stafa, the gap

bet.een the -ini-u- an" the -ai-u- a-ounts, .hich is the basis of

"eter-ining the proper penalty to be i-pose", .oul" be too .i"e an" the penalty

i-posable .oul" no longer be co--ensurate to the act co--itte" an" the alue ofthe thing stolen or the "a-age cause"0

I! $rticle 5*+, or the penalties for the cri-e of Theft, the alue .oul" be -o"ifie"

but the penalties are not change"0

7! P7(,***!** to P((,***!** .ill beco-e P7,(**,***!** to P(,(**,***!**,

punishe" by prision -ayor -ini-u- to prision -ayor -e"iu- %? years an"

7 "ay to 7* years&!

(! P?,***!** to P7(,***!** .ill beco-e P?**,***!** to P7,(**,***!**,

punishe" by prision correccional -e"iu- an" to prision correccional

-ai-u- %( years, @ -onths an" 7 "ay to ? years&!(@

5! P(**!** to P?,***!** .ill beco-e P(*,***!** to P?**,***!**,

punishable by prision correccional -ini-u- to prision correccional -e"iu-

%? -onths an" 7 "ay to @ years an" ( -onths&!

@! P<*!** to P(**!** .ill beco-e P<,***!** to P(*,***!**, punishable by

arresto -ayor -e"iu- to prision correccional -ini-u- %( -onths an" 7

"ay to ( years an" @ -onths&!

<! P<!** to P<*!** .ill beco-e P<**!** to P<,***!**, punishable by

arresto -ayor %7 -onth an" 7 "ay to ? -onths&!

?! P<!** .ill beco-e P<**!**, punishable by arresto -ayor -ini-u- to iolates the secon" re>uisite an", the IPR iolates re>uisite no! 5, consi"ering that







?! P<!** .ill beco-e P<**!**, punishable by arresto -ayor -ini-u- to

arresto -ayor -e"iu-!

!

II! $rticle 57<, or the penalties for the cri-e of #stafa, the alue .oul" also be

-o"ifie" but the penalties are not change", as follo.s0

7st! P7(,***!** to P((,***!**, .ill beco-e P7,(**,***!**

to P(,(**,***!**, punishable by prision correccional -ai-u- to prision-ayor -ini-u- %@ years, ( -onths an" 7 "ay to ) years&!(<

(n"! P?,***!** to P7(,***!** .ill beco-e P?**,***!** to P7,(**,***!**,

punishable by prision correccional -ini-u- to prision correccional -e"iu-

%? -onths an" 7 "ay to @ years an" ( -onths&!(?

5r"! P(**!** to P?,***!** .ill beco-e P(*,***!** to P?**,***!**,

punishable by arresto -ayor -ai-u- to prision correccional -ini-u- %@

-onths an" 7 "ay to ( years an" @ -onths&!

@th! P(**!** .ill beco-e P(*,***!**, punishable by arresto -ayor

-ai-u- %@ -onths an" 7 "ay to ? -onths&!

$n argu-ent raise" by Dean 'ose 3anuel I! Dio8no, one of our estee-e" a-ici

curiae, is that the incre-ental penalty proi"e" un"er $rticle 57< of the RPC

iolates the #>ual Protection Clause!

The e>ual protection clause re>uires e>uality a-ong e>uals, .hich is "eter-ine"

accor"ing to a ali" classification! The test "eelope" by 2urispru"ence here an"

yon"er is that of reasonableness,(: .hich has four re>uisites0

%7& The classification rests on substantial "istinctions

%(& It is ger-ane to the purposes of the la.

%5& It is not li-ite" to eisting con"itions only an"

%@& It applies e>ually to all -e-bers of the sa-e class!()

$ccor"ing to Dean Dio8no, the Incre-ental Penalty Rule %IPR& "oes not rest on

substantial "istinctions asP7*,***!** -ay hae been substantial in the past, but it

is not so to"ay, .hich iolates the first re>uisite the IPR .as "eise" so that those

.ho co--it estafa inoling higher a-ounts .oul" receie heaier penalties

ho.eer, this is no longer achiee", because a person .ho steals P7@(,***!**

.oul" receie the sa-e penalty as so-eone .ho steals hun"re"s of -illions, .hich

iolates the secon" re>uisite an", the IPR iolates re>uisite no! 5, consi"ering that

the IPR is li-ite" to eisting con"itions at the ti-e the la. .as pro-ulgate",

con"itions that no longer eist to"ay!

$ssu-ing that the Court sub-its to the argu-ent of Dean Dio8no an" "eclares the

incre-ental penalty in $rticle 57< unconstitutional for iolating the e>ual protection

clause, .hat then is the penalty that shoul" be applie" in case the a-ount of the

thing sub2ect -atter of the cri-e ecee"s P((,***!** It see-s that the

proposition poses -ore >uestions than ans.ers, .hich lea"s us een -ore to

conclu"e that the appropriate re-e"y is to refer these -atters to Congress for the-to eercise their inherent po.er to legislate la.s!

#en Dean Dio8no .as of the opinion that if the Court "eclares the IPR

unconstitutional, the re-e"y is to go to Congress! Thus0

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

No., your position is to "eclare that the incre-ental penalty shoul" be struc8 "o.n

as unconstitutional because it is absur"!

D#$N DIOENO0

$bsur", it iolates e>ual protection, Gour Honor, an" cruel an" unusual punish-ent!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Then .hat .ill be the penalty that .e are going to i-pose if the a-ount is -ore

than T.enty;T.o Thousan" %P((,***!**& Pesos!

D#$N DIOENO0

=ell, that .oul" be for Congress to !!! if this Court .ill "eclare the incre-ental

penalty rule unconstitutional, then that .oul" !!! the oi" shoul" be fille" by

Congress!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

But in your presentation, you .ere fiing the a-ount at One Hun"re" Thousan"

%P7**,***!**& Pesos !!!

D#$N DIOENO0

=ell, -y presen !!! %interrupte"& No, Gour Honor!











, y p % p &

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

6or eery One Hun"re" Thousan" %P7**,***!**& Pesos in ecess of T.enty;T.o

Thousan" %P((,***!**& Pesos you .ere suggesting an a""itional penalty of one %7&

year, "i" I get you right

D#$N DIOENO0

Ges, Gour Honor, that is, if the court .ill ta8e the route of statutory interpretation!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

$h !!!

D#$N DIOENO0

If the Court .ill say that they can go beyon" the literal .or"ing of the la.!!!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

But if .e "e !!! %interrupte"&

D#$N DIOENO0

!!!!then!!!!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

$h, yeah! But if .e "eclare the incre-ental penalty as unsconstitutional, the court

cannot fi the a-ount !!!

D#$N DIOENO0

No, Gour Honor!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

!!! as the e>uialent of one, as an incre-ental penalty in ecess of T.enty;T.o

Thousan" %P((,***!**& Pesos!

D#$N DIOENO0

,

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

The Court cannot "o that!

D#$N DIOENO0

Coul" not be!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

The only re-e"y is to go to Congress!!!

D#$N DIOENO0

Ges, Gour Honor!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

!!! an" "eter-ine the alue or the a-ount!

D#$N DIOENO0

Ges, Gour Honor!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

That .ill be e>uialent to the incre-ental penalty of one %7& year in ecess of

T.enty;T.o Thousan" %P((,***!**& Pesos!

D#$N DIOENO0

Ges, Gour Honor!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

The a-ount in ecess of T.enty;T.o Thousan" %P((,***!**& Pesos!

Than8 you, Dean!

D#$N DIOENO0

Than8 you! ta8e such public fun"s, or property, .holly or partially, or shall other.ise be guilty



y

(+

Dean Dio8no also conten"s that $rticle 57< of the Reise" Penal Co"e constitutes

cruel an" unusual punish-ent! Citing Sole- ! Hel-,5* Dean Dio8no aers that the

Fnite" States 6e"eral Supre-e Court has epan"e" the application of a si-ilar

Constitutional proision prohibiting cruel an" unusual punish-ent, to the "uration of

the penalty, an" not 2ust its for-! The court therein rule" that three things -ust be

"one to "eci"e .hether a sentence is proportional to a specific cri-e, i4! %7&Co-pare the nature an" graity of the offense, an" the harshness of the penalty

%(& Co-pare the sentences i-pose" on other cri-inals in the sa-e 2uris"iction, i!e!,

.hether -ore serious cri-es are sub2ect to the sa-e penalty or to less serious

penalties an" %5& Co-pare the sentences i-pose" for co--ission of the sa-e

cri-e in other 2uris"ictions!

Ho.eer, the case of Sole- ! Hel- cannot be applie" in the present case, because

in Sole- .hat respon"ent therein "ee-e" cruel .as the penalty i-pose" by the

state court of South Da8ota after it too8 into account the latters reci"iist statute

an" not the original penalty for uttering a 9no account9 chec8! Nor-ally, the

-ai-u- punish-ent for the cri-e .oul" hae been fie years i-prison-ent an" a

<,***!** fine! Nonetheless, respon"ent .as sentence" to life i-prison-ent.ithout the possibility of parole un"er South Da8otas reci"iist statute because of

his si prior felony conictions! Surely, the factual antece"ents of Sole- are

"ifferent fro- the present controersy!

=ith respect to the cri-e of Jualifie" Theft, ho.eer, it is true that the i-posable

penalty for the offense is high! Neertheless, the rationale for the i-position of a

higher penalty against a "o-estic serant is the fact that in the co--ission of the

cri-e, the helper .ill essentially graely abuse the trust an" confi"ence repose"

upon her by her e-ployer! $fter accepting an" allo.ing the helper to be a -e-ber

of the househol", thus entrusting upon such person the protection an" safe8eeping

of the e-ployers loe" ones an" properties, a subse>uent betrayal of that trust is

so repulsie as to .arrant the necessity of i-posing a higher penalty to "eter the

co--ission of such .rongful acts!

There are other cri-es .here the penalty of fine an"1or i-prison-ent are

"epen"ent on the sub2ect -atter of the cri-e an" .hich, by a"opting the proposal,

-ay create serious i-plications! 6or ea-ple, in the cri-e of 3alersation, the

penalty i-pose" "epen"s on the a-ount of the -oney -alerse" by the public

official, thus0

$rt! (7:! 3alersation of public fun"s or property Presu-ption of -alersation!

$ny public officer .ho, by reason of the "uties of his office, is accountable for public

fun"s or property, shall appropriate the sa-e or shall ta8e or -isappropriate or

shall consent, through aban"on-ent or negligence, shall per-it any other person to

p , p p y, y p y, g y

of the -isappropriation or -alersation of such fun"s or property, shall suffer0

7! The penalty of prision correccional in its -e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s,

if the a-ount inole" in the -isappropriation or -alersation "oes not

ecee" t.o hun"re" pesos!

(! The penalty of prision -ayor in its -ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s, if the

a-ount inole" is -ore than t.o hun"re" pesos but "oes not ecee" si

thousan" pesos!

5! The penalty of prision -ayor in its -ai-u- perio" to reclusion

te-poral in its -ini-u- perio", if the a-ount inole" is -ore than si

thousan" pesos but is less than t.ele thousan" pesos!

@! The penalty of reclusion te-poral, in its -e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s,

if the a-ount inole" is -ore than t.ele thousan" pesos but is less than

t.enty;t.o thousan" pesos! If the a-ount ecee"s the latter, the penalty

shall be reclusion te-poral in its -ai-u- perio" to reclusion perpetua!

In all cases, persons guilty of -alersation shall also suffer the penalty of perpetual

special "is>ualification an" a fine e>ual to the a-ount of the fun"s -alerse" ore>ual to the total alue of the property e-be44le"!

The failure of a public officer to hae "uly forthco-ing any public fun"s or property

.ith .hich he is chargeable, upon "e-an" by any "uly authori4e" officer, shall be

pri-a facie ei"ence that he has put such -issing fun"s or property to personal

use!

The aboe;proisions conte-plate a situation .herein the /oern-ent loses -oney

"ue to the unla.ful acts of the offen"er! Thus, follo.ing the proposal, if the a-ount

-alerse" is P(**!** %un"er the eisting la.&, the a-ount no.

beco-es P(*,***!** an" the penalty is prision correccional in its -e"iu- an"

-ai-u- perio"s %( years @ -onths an" 7 "ay to ? years&! The penalty -ay not be

co--ensurate to the act of e-be44le-ent of P(*,***!** co-pare" to the acts

co--itte" by public officials punishable by a special la., i!e!, Republic $ct No! 5*7+

or the $nti;/raft an" Corrupt Practices $ct, specifically Section 5,57 .herein the

in2ury cause" to the goern-ent is not generally "efine" by any -onetary a-ount,

the penalty %? years an" 7 -onth to 7< years&5( un"er the $nti;/raft a. .ill no.

beco-e higher! This shoul" not be the case, because in the cri-e of -alersation,

the public official ta8es a"antage of his public position to e-be44le the fun" or

property of the goern-ent entruste" to hi-!

The sai" ine>uity is also apparent in the cri-e of Robbery .ith force upon things

%inhabite" or uninhabite"& .here the alue of the thing unla.fully ta8en an" the act

of unla.ful entry are the bases of the penalty i-posable, an" also, in 3alicious

3ischief, .here the penalty of i-prison-ent or fine is "epen"ent on the cost of the $rticle (7? %Possession of prohibite" interest by a public officer&, $rticle (7) %6ailure












"a-age cause"!

In Robbery .ith force upon things %inhabite" or uninhabite"&, if .e increase the

alue of the thing unla.fully ta8en, as propose" in the ponencia, the sole basis of

the penalty .ill no. be the alue of the thing unla.fully ta8en an" no longer the

ele-ent of force e-ploye" in entering the pre-ises! It -ay li8e.ise cause an

ine>uity bet.een the cri-e of Jualifie" Trespass to D.elling un"er $rticle ()*, an"

this 8in" of robbery because the for-er is punishable by prision correccional in its

-e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s %( years, @ -onths an" 7 "ay to ? years& an" a fine

not ecee"ing P7,***!** %P7**,***!** no. if the ratio is 707**& .here entrance to

the pre-ises is .ith iolence or inti-i"ation, .hich is the -ain 2ustification of the

penalty! =hereas in the cri-e of Robbery .ith force upon things, it is punishe" .ith

a penalty of prision -ayor %? years an" 7 "ay to 7( years& if the intru"er is

unar-e" .ithout the penalty of 6ine "espite the fact that it is not -erely the illegal

entry that is the basis of the penalty but li8e.ise the unla.ful ta8ing!

6urther-ore, in the cri-e of Other 3ischiefs un"er $rticle 5(+, the highest penalty

that can be i-pose" is arresto -ayor in its -e"iu- an" -ai-u- perio"s %(

-onths an" 7 "ay to ? -onths& if the alue of the "a-age cause"

ecee"s P7,***!**, but un"er the proposal, the alue of the "a-age .ill no.

beco-e P7**,***!** %707**&, an" still punishable by arresto -ayor %7 -onth an" 7

"ay to ? -onths&! $n", if the alue of the "a-age" property "oes not

ecee" P(**!**, the penalty is arresto -enor or a fine of not less than the alue of

the "a-age cause" an" not -ore than P(**!**, if the a-ount inole" "oes not

ecee" P(**!** or cannot be esti-ate"! Fn"er the proposal,P(**!** .ill no.

beco-e P(*,***!**, .hich si-ply -eans that the fine of P(**!** un"er the

eisting la. .ill no. beco-e P(*,***!**! The a-ount of 6ine un"er this situation

.ill no. beco-e ecessie an" afflictie in nature "espite the fact that the offense

is categori4e" as a light felony penali4e" .ith a light penalty un"er $rticle (? of the

RPC!55 Fnless .e also a-en" $rticle (? of the RPC, there . ill be grae i-plications

on the penalty of 6 ine, but changing the sa-e through Court "ecision, either

epressly or i-plie"ly, -ay not be legally an" constitutionally feasible!

There are other cri-es against property an" s.in"ling in the RPC that -ay also beaffecte" by the proposal, such as those that i-pose i-prison-ent an"1or 6ine as a

penalty base" on the alue of the "a-age cause", to .it0 $rticle 577 %Theft of the

property of the National ibrary an" National 3useu-&, $rticle 57( %Occupation of

real property or usurpation of real rights in property&, $rticle 575 %$ltering

boun"aries or lan"-ar8s&, $rticle 57? %Other for-s of s.in"ling&, $rticle 57:

%S.in"ling a -inor&, $rticle 57) %Other "eceits&, $rticle 5() %Special cases of

-alicious -ischief& an" $rticle 557 %Destroying or "a-aging statues, public

-onu-ents or paintings&! Other cri-es that i-pose 6ine as a penalty .ill also be

affecte", such as0 $rticle (75 %6rau"s against the public treasury an" si-ilar

offenses&, $rticle (7< %Prohibite" Transactions&,

of accountable officer to ren"er accounts&, $rticle (7+ %6ailure of a responsible

public officer to ren"er accounts before leaing the country&!

In a""ition, the proposal .ill not only affect cri-es un"er the RPC! It .ill also affect

cri-es .hich are punishable by special penal la.s, such as Illegal ogging or

Violation of Section ?) of Presi"ential Decree No! :*<, as a-en"e"!5@The la. treats

cutting, gathering, collecting an" possessing ti-ber or other forest pro"ucts .ithout

license as an offense as grae as an" e>uialent to the felony of >ualifie"

theft!5< Fn"er the la., the offen"er shall be punishe" .ith the penalties i-pose"

un"er $rticles 5*+ an" 57*5? of the Reise" Penal Co"e, .hich -eans that the

penalty i-posable for the offense is, again, base" on the alue of the ti-ber or

forest pro"ucts inole" in the offense! No., if .e accept the sai" proposal in the

cri-e of Theft, .ill this particular cri-e of Illegal ogging be a-en"e" also in so far

as the penalty is concerne" because the penalty is "epen"ent on $rticles 5*+ an"

57* of the RPC The ans.er is in the negatie because the soun"ness of this

particular la. is not in >uestion!

=ith the nu-erous cri-es "efine" an" penali4e" un"er the Reise" Penal Co"e an"

Special a.s, an" other relate" proisions of these la.s affecte" by the proposal, a

thorough stu"y is nee"e" to "eter-ine its effectiity an" necessity! There -ay be

so-e proisions of the la. that shoul" be a-en"e" neertheless, this Court is in

no position to conclu"e as to the intentions of the fra-ers of the Reise" Penal Co"e

by -erely -a8ing a stu"y of the applicability of the penalties i-posable in the

present ti-es! Such is not .ithin the co-petence of the Court but of the egislature

.hich is e-po.ere" to con"uct public hearings on the -atter, consult legal

lu-inaries an" .ho, after "ue procee"ings, can "eci"e .hether or not to a-en" or

to reise the >uestione" la. or other la.s, or een create a ne. legislation .hich

.ill a"opt to the ti-es!

$"-itte"ly, Congress is a.are that there is an urgent nee" to a-en" the Reise"

Penal Co"e! During the oral argu-ents, counsel for the Senate infor-e" the Court

that at present, fifty;si %<?& bills are no. pen"ing in the Senate see8ing to a-en"

the Reise" Penal Co"e,5: each one proposing -uch nee"e" change an" up"ates to

archaic la.s that .ere pro-ulgate" "eca"es ago .hen the political, socio;econo-ic,an" cultural settings .ere far "ifferent fro- to"ays con"itions!

Verily, the pri-or"ial "uty of the Court is -erely to apply the la. in such a .ay that

it shall not usurp legislatie po.ers by 2u"icial legislation an" that in the course of

such application or construction, it shoul" not -a8e or superise legislation, or

un"er the guise of interpretation, -o"ify, reise, a-en", "istort, re-o"el, or re.rite

the la., or gie the la. a construction .hich is repugnant to its ter-s!5) The Court

shoul" apply the la. in a -anner that .oul" gie effect to their letter an" spirit,

especially .hen the la. is clear as to its intent an" purpose! Succinctly put, the

Court shoul" shy a.ay fro- encroaching upon the pri-ary function of a co;e>ual

branch of the /oern-ent other.ise, this .oul" lea" to an inecusable breach of

the "octrine of separation of po.ers by -eans of 2u"icial legislation!

3oreoer, it is to be note" that ciil in"e-nity is, technically, not a penalty or a In a""ition, so-e -ay ie. the penalty proi"e" by la. for the offense co--itte"
















6ine hence, it can be increase" by the Court .hen appropriate! $rticle ((*? of the

Ciil Co"e proi"es0

$rt! ((*?! The a-ount of "a-ages for "eath cause" by a cri-e or >uasi;"elict shall

be at least three thousan" pesos, een though there -ay hae been -itigating

circu-stances! In a""ition0

%7& The "efen"ant shall be liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the

"ecease", an" the in"e-nity shall be pai" to the heirs of the latter suchin"e-nity shall in eery case be assesse" an" a.ar"e" by the court,

unless the "ecease" on account of per-anent physical "isability not cause"

by the "efen"ant, ha" no earning capacity at the ti-e of his "eath

%(& If the "ecease" .as oblige" to gie support accor"ing to the proisions

of $rticle (+7, the recipient .ho is not an heir calle" to the "ece"entAs

inheritance by the la. of testate or intestate succession, -ay "e-an"

support fro- the person causing the "eath, for a perio" not ecee"ing fie

years, the eact "uration to be fie" by the court

%5& The spouse, legiti-ate an" illegiti-ate "escen"ants an" ascen"ants of

the "ecease" -ay "e-an" -oral "a-ages for -ental anguish by reason of the "eath of the "ecease"!

In our 2uris"iction, ciil in"e-nity is a.ar"e" to the offen"e" party as a 8in" of

-onetary restitution or co-pensation to the icti- for the "a-age or infraction that

.as "one to the latter by the accuse", .hich in a sense only coers the ciil aspect!

Precisely, it is ciil in"e-nity! Thus, in a cri-e .here a person "ies, in a""ition to

the penalty of i-prison-ent i-pose" to the offen"er, the accuse" is also or"ere" to

pay the icti- a su- of -oney as restitution! Clearly, this a.ar" of ciil in"e-nity

"ue to the "eath of the icti- coul" not be conte-plate" as a8in to the alue of a

thing that is unla.fully ta8en .hich is the basis in the i-position of the proper

penalty in certain cri-es! Thus, the reasoning in increasing the alue of ciil

in"e-nity a.ar"e" in so-e offense cannot be the sa-e reasoning that .oul"sustain the a"option of the suggeste" ratio! $lso, it is apparent fro- $rticle ((*?

that the la. only i-poses a -ini-u- a-ount for a.ar"s of ciil in"e-nity, .hich

is P5,***!**! The la. "i" not proi"e for a ceiling! Thus, although the -ini-u-

a-ount for the a.ar" cannot be change", increasing the a-ount a.ar"e" as ciil

in"e-nity can be ali"ly -o"ifie" an" increase" .hen the present circu-stance

.arrants it! Corollarily, -oral "a-ages un"er $rticle (((*5+ of the Ciil Co"e also

"oes not fi the a-ount of "a-ages that can be a.ar"e"! It is "iscretionary upon

the court, "epen"ing on the -ental anguish or the suffering of the priate offen"e"

party! The a-ount of -oral "a-ages can, in relation to ciil in"e-nity, be a"2uste"

so long as it "oes not ecee" the a.ar" of ciil in"e-nity!

as tanta-ount to cruel punish-ent! Ho.eer, all penalties are generally harsh,

being punitie in nature! =hether or not they are ecessie or a-ount to cruel

punish-ent is a -atter that shoul" be left to la.-a8ers! It is the prerogatie of the

courts to apply the la., especially .hen they are clear an" not sub2ect to any other

interpretation than that .hich is plainly .ritten!

Si-ilar to the argu-ent of Dean Dio8no, one of 'ustice $ntonio Carpios opinions is

that the incre-ental penalty proision shoul" be "eclare" unconstitutional an" that

the courts shoul" only i-pose the penalty correspon"ing to the a-ount

of P((,***!**, regar"less if the actual a-ount inole" ecee"s P((,***!**! $s

suggeste", ho.eer, fro- no. until the la. is properly a-en"e" by Congress, all

cri-es of #stafa .ill no longer be punishe" by the appropriate penalty! $ conun"ru-

in the regular course of cri-inal 2ustice .oul" occur .hen eery accuse" conicte"

of the cri-e of estafa .ill be -ete" penalties "ifferent fro- the proper penalty that

shoul" be i-pose"! Such "rastic t.ist in the application of the la. has no legal basis

an" "irectly runs counter to .hat the la. proi"es!

It shoul" be note" that the "eath penalty .as reintro"uce" in the "ispensation of

cri-inal 2ustice by the Ra-os $"-inistration by irtue of Republic $ct No! :?<+@* in

Dece-ber 7++5! The sai" la. has been >uestione" before this Court! There is,

arguably, no punish-ent -ore cruel than that of "eath! Get still, fro- the ti-e the

"eath penalty .as re;i-pose" until its lifting in 'une (**? by Republic $ct No!

+5@?,@7 the Court "i" not i-pe"e the i-position of the "eath penalty on the groun"

that it is a 9cruel punish-ent9 .ithin the purie. of Section 7+ %7&,@( $rticle III of

the Constitution! Flti-ately, it .as through an act of Congress suspen"ing the

i-position of the "eath penalty that le" to its non;i-position an" not ia the

interention of the Court!

#en if the i-posable penalty a-ounts to cruel punish-ent, the Court cannot

"eclare the proision of the la. fro- .hich the proper penalty e-anates

unconstitutional in the present action! Not only is it iolatie of "ue process,

consi"ering that the State an" the concerne" parties .ere not gien the opportunity

to co--ent on the sub2ect -atter, it is settle" that the constitutionality of a statute

cannot be attac8e" collaterally because constitutionality issues -ust be plea"e""irectly an" not collaterally,@5 -ore so in the present controersy .herein the issues

neer touche" upon the constitutionality of any of the proisions of the Reise"

Penal Co"e!

Besi"es, it has long been hel" that the prohibition of cruel an" unusual punish-ents

is generally ai-e" at the for- or character of the punish-ent rather than its

seerity in respect of "uration or a-ount, an" applies to punish-ents .hich public

senti-ent has regar"e" as cruel or obsolete, for instance, those inflicte" at the

.hipping post, or in the pillory, burning at the sta8e, brea8ing on the .heel,

"ise-bo.eling, an" the li8e! 6ine an" i-prison-ent .oul" not thus be .ithin the

prohibition!@@

It ta8es -ore than -erely being harsh, ecessie, out of proportion, or seere for a PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0


















penalty to be obnoious to the Constitution! The fact that the punish-ent

authori4e" by the statute is seere "oes not -a8e it cruel an" unusual! #presse" in

other ter-s, it has been hel" that to co-e un"er the ban, the punish-ent -ust be

9flagrantly an" plainly oppressie,9 9.holly "isproportionate to the nature of the

offense as to shoc8 the -oral sense of the co--unity!9@<

Cruel as it -ay be, as "iscusse" aboe, it is for the Congress to a-en" the la. an"

a"apt it to our -o"ern ti-e!

The solution to the present controersy coul" not be sole" by -erely a"2usting the

>uestione" -onetary alues to the present alue of -oney base" only on the

current inflation rate! There are other factors an" ariables that nee" to be ta8en

into consi"eration, researche", an" "eliberate" upon before the sai" alues coul" be

accurately an" properly a"2uste"! The effects on the society, the in2ure" party, the

accuse", its socio;econo-ic i-pact, an" the li8es -ust be painsta8ingly ealuate"

an" .eighe" upon in or"er to arrie at a .holistic change that all of us beliee

shoul" be -a"e to our eisting la.! De2ecte"ly, the Court is ill;e>uippe", has no

resources, an" lac8s sufficient personnel to con"uct public hearings an" sponsor

stu"ies an" sureys to ali"ly effect these changes in our Reise" Penal Co"e! This

function clearly an" appropriately belongs to Congress! #en Professor Ta"iar

conce"es to this conclusion, to .it0

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Geah, 'ust one >uestion! Gou are suggesting that in or"er to "eter-ine the alue of

Peso you hae to ta8e into consi"eration seeral factors!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

Ges!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Per capita inco-e!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

Per capita inco-e!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Consu-er price in"e!

Geah!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Inflation !!!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

Ges!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

!!! an" so on! Is the Supre-e Court e>uippe" to "eter-ine those factors

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

There are -any .ays by .hich the alue of the Philippine Peso can be "eter-ine"

utili4ing all of those econo-ic ter-s!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Geah, but !!!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

$n" I "ont thin8 it is .ithin the po.er of the Supre-e Court to pass upon an" peg

the alue to One Hun"re" %P7**!**& Pesos to !!!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Geah!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

!!! One %P7!**!**& Peso in 7+5*!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

That is legislatie in nature!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

That is -y position that the Supre-e Court !!! pegge" the -ini-u- su-, increasing the a-ount grante" as ciil in"e-nity is not





'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Geah, o8ay!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

!!! has no po.er to utili4e the po.er of 2u"icial reie. to in or"er to a"2ust, to -a8e

the a"2ust-ent that is a po.er that belongs to the legislature!

'FSTIC# P#R$T$0

Than8 you, Professor!

PRO6#SSOR T$DI$R0

Than8 you!@?

6inally, the opinion a"ance" by Chief 'ustice 3aria our"es P! $! Sereno echoes the

ie. that the role of the Court is not -erely to "ispense 2ustice, but also the actie"uty to preent in2ustice! Thus, in or"er to preent in2ustice in the present

controersy, the Court shoul" not i-pose an obsolete penalty pegge" eighty three

years ago, but consi"er the propose" ratio of 707** as si-ply co-pensating for

inflation! 6urther-ore, the Court has in the past ta8en into consi"eration 9change"

con"itions9 or 9significant changes in circu-stances9 in its "ecisions!

Si-ilarly, the Chief 'ustice is of the ie. that the Court is not "eling into the

ali"ity of the substance of a statute! The issue is no "ifferent fro- the Courts

a"2ust-ent of in"e-nity in cri-es against persons, .hich the Court ha" preiously

a"2uste" in light of current ti-es, li8e in the case of People ! Panto2a!@: Besi"es,

$rticle 7* of the Ciil Co"e -an"ates a presu-ption that the la.-a8ing bo"y

inten"e" right an" 2ustice to preail!

=ith "ue respect to the opinions an" proposals a"ance" by the Chief 'ustice an"

-y Colleagues, all the proposals ulti-ately lea" to prohibite" 2u"icial legislation!

Short of being repetitious an" as etensiely "iscusse" aboe, it is truly beyon" the

po.ers of the Court to legislate la.s, such i--ense po.er belongs to Congress an"

the Court shoul" refrain fro- crossing this clear;cut "ii"e! =ith regar" to ciil

in"e-nity, as eluci"ate" before, this refers to ciil liability .hich is a.ar"e" to the

offen"e" party as a 8in" of -onetary restitution! It is truly base" on the alue of

-oney! The sa-e cannot be sai" on penalties because, as earlier state", penalties

are not only base" on the alue of -oney, but on seeral other factors! 6urther,

since the la. is silent as to the -ai-u- a-ount that can be a.ar"e" an" only

proscribe"! Thus, it can be a"2uste" in light of current con"itions!

No., .ith regar" to the penalty i-pose" in the present case, the C$ -o"ifie" the

ruling of the RTC! The RTC i-pose" the in"eter-inate penalty of four %@& years an"

t.o %(& -onths of prision correccional in its -e"iu- perio", as -ini-u-, to

fourteen %7@& years an" eight %)& -onths of reclusion te-poral in its -ini-u-

perio", as -ai-u-! Ho.eer, the C$ i-pose" the in"eter-inate penalty of four

%@& years an" t.o %(& -onths of prision correccional, as -ini-u-, to eight %)&

years of prision -ayor, as -ai-u-, plus one %7& year for each

a""itional P7*,***!**, or a total of seen %:& years!

In co-puting the penalty for this type of estafa, this CourtAs ruling in Cos-e, 'r! !

People@) is highly instructie, thus0

=ith respect to the i-posable penalty, $rticle 57< of the Reise" Penal Co"e

proi"es0

$RT! 57< S.in"ling %estafa&! ; $ny person .ho shall "efrau" another by any of the

-eans -entione" hereinbelo. shall be punishe" by0

7st! The penalty of prision correccional in its -ai-u- perio" to prision -ayor in its-ini-u- perio", if the a-ount of the frau" is oer 7(,*** but "oes not ecee"

((,*** pesos, an" if such a-ount ecee"s the latter su-, the penalty proi"e" in

this paragraph shall be i-pose" in its -ai-u- perio", a""ing one year for each

a""itional 7*,*** pesos but the total penalty .hich -ay be i-pose" shall not

ecee" t.enty years! In such case, an" in connection .ith the accessory penalties

.hich -ay be i-pose" an" for the purpose of the other proisions of this Co"e, the

penalty shall be ter-e" prision -ayor or reclusion te-poral, as the case -ay be!

The penalty prescribe" by $rticle 57< is co-pose" of only t.o, not three, perio"s, in

.hich case, $rticle ?< of the sa-e Co"e re>uires the "iision of the ti-e inclu"e" in

the penalty into three e>ual portions of ti-e inclu"e" in the penalty prescribe",

for-ing one perio" of each of the three portions! $pplying the latter proisions, the-ai-u-, -e"iu- an" -ini-u- perio"s of the penalty prescribe" are0

3ai-u- ; ? years, ) -onths, (7 "ays to ) years

3e"iu- ; < years, < -onths, 77 "ays to ? years, ) -onths, (* "ays

3ini-u- ; @ years, ( -onths, 7 "ay to < years, < -onths, 7* "ays@+

To co-pute the -ai-u- perio" of the prescribe" penalty, prisin correccional

-ai-u- to prisin -ayor -ini-u- shoul" be "ii"e" into three e>ual portions of

ti-e each of .hich portion shall be "ee-e" to for- one perio" in accor"ance .ith

$rticle ?<<* of the RPC!<7 In the present case, the a-ount inole" is P+),***!**, SO ORD#R#D!
















.hich ecee"sP((,***!**, thus, the -ai-u- penalty i-posable shoul" be .ithin

the -ai-u- perio" of ? years, ) -onths an" (7 "ays to ) years of prision -ayor!

$rticle 57< also states that a perio" of one year shall be a""e" to the penalty for

eery a""itional P7*,***!** "efrau"e" in ecess of P((,***!**, but in no case shall

the total penalty .hich -ay be i-pose" ecee" (* years!

Consi"ering that the a-ount of P+),***!** is P:?,***!** -ore than

the P((,***!** ceiling set by la., then, a""ing one year for each

a""itional P7*,***!**, the -ai-u- perio" of ? years, ) -onths an" (7 "ays to )

years of prision -ayor -ini-u- .oul" be increase" by : years! Ta8ing the

-ai-u- of the prescribe" penalty, .hich is ) years, plus an a""itional : years, the

-ai-u- of the in"eter-inate penalty is 7< years!

$pplying the In"eter-inate Sentence a., since the penalty prescribe" by la. for

the estafa charge against petitioner is prision correccional -ai-u- to prision

-ayor -ini-u-, the penalty net lo.er .oul" then be prision correccional in its

-ini-u- an" -e"iu- perio"s!

Thus, the -ini-u- ter- of the in"eter-inate sentence shoul" be any.here fro- ?

-onths an" 7 "ay to @ years an" ( -onths!

One final note, the Court shoul" gie Congress a chance to perfor- its pri-or"ial

"uty of la.-a8ing! The Court shoul" not pre;e-pt Congress an" usurp its inherent

po.ers of -a8ing an" enacting la.s! =hile it -ay be the -ost epe"itious

approach, a short cut by 2u"icial fiat is a "angerous proposition, lest the Court "are

trespass on prohibite" 2u"icial legislation!

=H#R#6OR#, the Petition for Reie. on Certiorari "ate" Noe-ber <, (**: of

petitioner ito Corpu4 is hereby D#NI#D! Conse>uently, the Decision "ate" 3arch

((, (**: an" Resolution "ate" Septe-ber <, (**: of the Court of $ppeals, .hich

affir-e" .ith -o"ification the Decision "ate" 'u ly 5*, (**@ of the Regional Trial

Court, Branch @?, San 6ernan"o City, fin"ing petitioner guilty beyon" reasonable

"oubt of the cri-e of #stafa un"er $rticle 57<, paragraph %7&, sub;paragraph %b& ofthe Reise" Penal Co"e, are hereby $66IR3#D .ith 3ODI6IC$TION that the penalty

i-pose" is the in"eter-inate penalty of i-prison-ent ranging fro- THR## %5&

G#$RS, T=O %(& 3ONTHS an" ##V#N D$GS of prision correccional, as -ini-u-, to

6I6T##N %7<& G#$RS of reclusion te-poral as -ai-u-!

Pursuant to $rticle < of the Reise" Penal Co"e, let a Copy of this Decision be

furnishe" the Presi"ent of the Republic of the Philippines, through the Depart-ent

of 'ustice!

$lso, let a copy of this Decision be furnishe" the Presi"ent of the Senate an" the

Spea8er of the House of Representaties!

The Case




SUPREME COURT

3anila

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 16130 !&'&r 15, 2014

RICAR"O ME"INA, !R. ORIEL, Petitioner,

s!


D # C I S I O N

ERSAMIN, J.:

Cre"ibility of .itnesses is "eter-ine" by the confor-ity of their testi-onies to

hu-an 8no.le"ge, obseration an" eperience!

Ricar"o 3e"ina 'r! %Ricar"o& appeals by petition for reie. on certiorari the

affir-ance of his coniction for ho-ici"e .ith -o"ification of the penalty an" ciil

liability by the Court of $ppeals %C$& through the "ecision pro-ulgate" on 'uly :,

(**5!7 He ha" assaile" his coniction han"e" "o.n un"er the "ecision ren"ere" on

'anuary 57, (**7by the Regional Trial Court %RTC&, Branch (??, in Pasig City!( His

brother an" co;accuse", Ran"olf 3e"ina %Ran"olf&, .as ac>uitte" by the RTC for

insufficiency of ei"ence!

$ntece"ents

This case concerns the fatal stabbing of ino 3ulinya.e %ino& bet.een +0** an"

7*0** ocloc8 in the eening of $pril 5, 7++: at 'abson Street in $cacia,

Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City! The stabbing .as prece"e" by a fight "uring a bas8etball

ga-e bet.een Ross 3ulinya.e, inos son, an" Ronal" 3e"ina, the younger brother

of Ricar"o an" Ran"olf! In that fight, Ronal" ha" hit Ross .ith a piece of stone!

Hearing about the inole-ent of his brother in the f ight, Ran"olf rushe" to the

scene an" sent Ronal" ho-e! Ross .as brought to the hospital for treat-ent! Once

ino learne" that his son ha" sustaine" a hea" in2ury inflicte" by one of the

3e"inas, he forth.ith .ent to.ar"s the house of the 3e"inas acco-panie" by his

"rin8ing bu""ies, 'ose Tapan an" $bet 3enes! He ha" a brea" 8nife tuc8e" in the

bac8, but his co-panions .ere unar-e"! $long the .ay, ino encountere" Ran"olf

.ho- he confronte" about the fight! The t.o of the- ha" a heate" argu-ent!

$lthough Ran"olf trie" to eplain .hat ha" really happene" bet.een Ross an"

Ronal", ino lashe" out at Ran"olf an" grippe" the latters han"! Tapan al-ost

si-ultaneously punche" Ran"olf in the face! ino, alrea"y hol"ing the 8nife in his

right han", s.ung the 8nife at Ran"olf .ho .as not hit! Ran"olf retreate" to.ar"s

the store an" too8 t.o e-pty bottles of beer, bro8e the bottles an" attac8e" ino

.ith the-! $rriing at the scene, Ricar"o sa. .hat .as happening, an" confronte"

ino! $ co--otion ensue" bet.een the-! Ricar"o entere" their house to get a

8itchen 8nife an" ca-e out! ino -a"e a thrust at Ricar"o but faile" to hit the latter,

.ho then stabbe" ino on the left si"e of his chest, near the region of the heart!

ino fell face "o.n on the groun"! $fter that, Ricar"o .al8e" a.ay, .hile Ran"olf

thre. the bro8en bottles at the fallen ino!

inos in2uries .ere "escribe" as follo.s0

6airly nourishe", fairly "eelope" -ale ca"aer, in rigor -ortis, .ith post-orte-

lii"ity at the "epen"ent portions of the bo"y! Con2unctie lips an" nailbe"s are

pale!

H#$D, CH#ST $ND #6T EN##0

%7& acerate" .oun", left parietal region, -easuring ( by *!: c-, < c-

fro- the -i"sagittal line!

%(& $brasion, left parietal region, -easuring 7!( by *!? c-, ) c- fro- the

t i i"li

Ran"olf 3e"ina testifie" that ino 3ulinya.e attac8e" hi- .ith a 8nife hel" .ith his

i ht h " Th t 2 t f th t b " t i " b i 3 li t hi l ft








anterior -i"line!

%5& $brasion left -aillary region, -easuring ( by *!5, @!< c-, fro- the

anterior -i"line!

%@& Stab .oun", left -a--ary region, -easuring 5!? by 7!@ c-, <!< c-

fro- the anterior line, 7( c- "eep, "irecte" posterior.ar"s, "o.n.ar"s,

an" -e"ial.ar"s, thru the @th left intercostal space, piercing the

pericar"ial sac an" left entricle!

Cause of "eath is Stab .oun" of the chest!5

On $pril @, 7++:, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasig City charge" Ran"olf .ith

ho-ici"e!@ The infor-ation .as a-en"e" .ith leae of court to inclu"e Ricar"o as a

co;conspirator, alleging thusly0

On or about $pril 5, 7++: in Pasig City an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable

Court, the accuse", conspiring an" confe"erating together an" both of the-

-utually helping an" ai"ing one another, .ith intent to 8ill, "i" then an" there

.illfully, unla.fully an" feloniously attac8, assault, stab an" e-ploy personal

iolence upon the person of ino 3! 3ulinya.e, thereby inflicting upon the latterstab .oun", .hich "irectly cause" his "eath!

Contrary to la.!<

The Defense clai-e" that it .as ino .ho ha" attac8e" Ricar"o .ith a 8nife, an"

that ino ha" acci"entally stabbe" hi-self by falling front.ar" an" into his o.n

8nife!

'u"g-ent of the RTC

In its 2u"g-ent ren"ere" on 'anuary 57, (**7,

?

the RTC ac>uitte" Ran"olf butconicte" Ricar"o of ho-ici"e! It foun" no ei"ence of conspiracy bet.een Ran"olf

an" Ricar"o because their actions appeare" to be in"epen"ent an" separate fro-

each other an" "i" not sho. that they ha" -ounte" a 2oint attac8 against ino! It

re2ecte" Ricar"os "efense that the fatal stab .oun" of ino ha" been self;inflicte",

ratiocinating that0

The fatal .oun" of the "ecease" is0 stab .oun", left -a-ary KsicL region,

-easuring 5!? by 7!@ c-, <!< c- fro- the anterior -i"line, 7( c- "eep, "irecte"

posterior.ar"s, "o.n.ar"s, an" -e"ial.ar"s, thru the @th left intercostal space,

piercing the pericar"ial sac an" left entricle! %See #h! '&!

right han"! The tra2ectory of the stab .oun" sustaine" by ino 3ulinya.e at his left

-a--ary region as sho.n by the 3e"ico egal Report an" 3e"ico egal

#a-ination on the ca"aer of the "ecease" %#hs! ' an" & is inco-patible an"

inconsistent .ith the "efense of the accuse" that .hen 3ulinya.e .as -a8ing a

thrust, he fell front.ar" an" acci"entally stabbe" hi-self!

If the 8nife .as hel" .ith the right han" of ino 3ulinya.e, the stab .oun" .oul"

not hae been fro- the anterior -i"line, 7( c- "eep, "irecte" posterior.ar"s,

"o.n.ar"s, an" -e"ial.ar"s, thru the @th left intercostal space, piercing the

pericar"ial sac an" left entricle! The tra2ectory of the stab .oun" .oul" hae been

left.ar" an" up.ar" the bo"y of the "ecease" if he really fell front.ar" upon

it!: %#-phasis supplie"&

The RTC "ispose" an" "ecree"0

=H#R#6OR#, postulates consi"ere", this Court $CJFITS Ran"olf 3e"ina for

insufficiency of ei"ence to proe his guilt of the charge of ho-ici"e against hi-!

Ho.eer, the ei"ence of the prosecution has proen beyon" reasonable "oubt the

/FIT of the accuse" Ricar"o 3e"ina, 'r! y Oriel for ho-ici"e an" he is hereby

sentence" .ith a penalty of i-prison-ent of 6ourteen %7@& years an" #ight %)&3onths an" One %7& "ay to Seenteen %7:& years an" 6our %@& 3onths of reclusion

te-poral in its -e"iu- perio" there being neither aggraating nor -itigating

circu-stance %$rt! ?@, par! 7, Reise" Penal Co"e&!

The .i"o. 3arii 3ulinya.e is hereby a.ar"e" the a-ount of Thirty Thousan"

Pesos %P5*,***!**& as actual "a-ages an" the a-ount of 6ifty Thousan" Pesos

%P<*,***!**& as -oral "a-ages, payable by Ricar"o 3e"ina, 'r! y Oriel!

The bon"s poste" by both accuse" are hereby cancelle"!

SO ORD#R#D!)

Decision of the C$

Ricar"o appeale", but the C$ affir-e" his coniction .ith -o"ification of the penalty

an" the ciil liability un"er the "ecision pro-ulgate" on 'uly :, (**5,+ to .it0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the present appeal is hereby DIS3ISS#D an"

the "ecision appeale" fro- in Cri-inal Case No! 77(*+7 is hereby $66IR3#D .ith

3ODI6IC$TIONS in that accuse";appellant Ricar"o 3e"ina, 'r! y Oriel is hereby

instea" sentence" to suffer an in"eter-inate prison ter- of eight %)& years an" one

%7& "ay to prision -ayor, as -ini-u-, to fourteen %7@& years, eight %)& -onths an"

one %7& "ay of reclusion te-poral, as -ai-u-, an" that the a.ar" of actual

"a-ages is hereby re"uce" fro- Thirty Thousan" Pesos %P5* *** **& to

IV




















"a-ages is hereby re"uce" fro- Thirty Thousan" Pesos %P5*,***!**& to

T.enty Thousan" Pesos %P(*,***!**& an" the su- of 6ifty Thousan" Pesos

%P<*,***!**& is further grante" as "eath in"e-nity in a""ition to the a.ar" of 6ifty

Thousan" Pesos %P<*,***!**& as -oral "a-ages!

=ith costs against the accuse";appellant!

SO ORD#R#D!

$fter his -otion for reconsi"eration .as "enie" on Noe-ber (7, (**5,7* Ricar"o

appeale" to the Court!

Issues

Ricar"o no. sub-its the follo.ing errors for consi"eration, na-ely0

I

TH# O=#R COFRT /R$V#G #RR#D IN ITS 6$CTF$ 6INDIN/ TH$T TH#KP#TITION#RL ST$BB#D INO 3FING$=# IN SPIT# O6 TH# 6$CT TH$T0

7! TH# PROS#CFTION =ITHH#D TH# PR#S#NT$TION O6 TH# $CTF$

ENIV#S DFRIN/ TH# H#$RIN/ O6 TH# C$S# =HICH PR#S#NT$TION

$ND BOOD $N$GSIS ON TH# T=O ENIV#S COFD H$V# PROV#N TH$T

INO 3FING$=# 6# ON HIS O=N ENI6#!

(! TH# 3#DICO;#/$ T#STI3ONG CORROBOR$T#D TH# 6$CT TH$T INO

3FING$=# 6# ON HIS O=N ENI6#!

II

TH# COFRT O6 $PP#$S /R$V#G #RR#D IN $DOPTIN/ TH# TRI$ COFRTS

OPINION TH$T TH# 6$T$ =OFND COFD NOT H$V# B##N S#6;IN6ICT#D

=HICH =$S TH# DIR#CT OPPOSIT# O6 TH# OPINION O6 TH# ONG 3#DICO;#/$

#P#RT PR#S#NT#D =HO POSITIV#G T#STI6I#D TH$T TH# 6$T$ =OFND C$N

POSSIBG B# S#6;IN6ICT#D!

III

TH# COFRT O6 $PP#$S #RR#D IN 3$EIN/ $ 6INDIN/ TH$T TH# KP#TITION#RL

ST$BB#D TH# D#C#$S#D BFT DISR#/$RD#D TH# 'FSTI6GIN/

CIRCF3ST$NC# O6 D#6#NS# O6 $ R#$TIV# %$RT! 77, RPC&

TH# COFRT O6 $PP#$S, #V#N ON TH# $SSF3PTION TH$T P#TITION#R ST$BB#D

INO 3FING$=#, DID NOT I3POS# TH# PROP#R S#NT#NC# BG DISR#/$RDIN/

TH# PR#S#NC# O6 3ITI/$TIN/ CIRCF3ST$NC#S $ND TH# $CE O6 $//R$V$TIN/

CIRCF3ST$NC# $TT#ND$NT TO TH# C$S#!77

Ruling of the Court

The appeal has no -erit!

6irst of all, Ricar"o argues that his stabbing an" inflicting of the fatal .oun" on ino

.ere not proen beyon" reasonable "oubt!

The argu-ent of Ricar"o is a -ere reiteration of his sub-issions that the C$ ha"

alrea"y ehaustiely consi"ere" an" passe" upon! He has not a""e" anything of

substance or .eight to persuasiely sho. that the C$ ha" erre" in affir-ing the

RTC!

Ti-e an" again, this Court has "eferre" to the trial courts factual fin"ings an"

ealuation of the cre"ibility of .itnesses, especially .hen affir-e" by the C$, in the

absence of any clear sho.ing that the trial court oerloo8e" or -isconstrue" cogent

facts an" circu-stances that .oul" 2ustify altering or reising such fin"ings an"

ealuation!7( This is because the trial courts "eter-ination procee"s fro- its first;

han" opportunity to obsere the "e-eanor of the .itnesses, their con"uct an"

attitu"e un"er grilling ea-ination, thereby placing the trial court in the uni>ue

position to assess the .itnesses cre"ibility an" to appreciate their truthfulness,

honesty an" can"or!75 But here Ricar"o has not pro2ecte" any strong an" co-pelling

reasons to s.ay the Court into re2ecting or reising such factual fin"ings an"

ealuation in his faor!

Secon"ly, Ricar"o conten"s that the State "i" not present as ei"ence in court the

t.o 8nies .iel"e" by hi- an" ino "espite repeate" "e-an"s for their

presentation that ha" the 8nies been presente", it coul" hae been "e-onstrate"to the trial court that the s-aller 8nife use" by ino ha" -ore bloo" stains than the

8nife hel" by hi- an" .oul" fit the si4e of the -ortal .oun" that his assertion that

ino ha" stabbe" hi-self .hen he stu-ble" an" lost his balance .hile s.inging his

8nife at Ran"olf .oul" hae been thereby ali"ate" an" that in his testi-ony, Dr!

#--anuel $ranas of the PNP Cri-e aboratory Serice, Southern Police District, "i"

not rule out the possibility that the .oun"s sustaine" by ino .ere self;inflicte"!

The contention "eseres no serious consi"eration!

To start .ith, the follo.ing fin"ings of the C$ in"icate that the ei"ence supporting

the coniction for ho-ici"e .as alrea"y oer.hel-ing een .ithout the

presentation of the 8nife hel" by the icti-, to .it0

Reie.ing the recor"s, =e fin" that appellants guilt as the perpetrator of the

unla.ful 8illing of the icti- ino 3ulinya.e ha" been a"e>uately proen by

the fin"ing of guilt .as base" on other ei"ence proing his co--ission of the

cri-e 7?














unla.ful 8illing of the icti- ino 3ulinya.e ha" been a"e>uately proen by

prosecution ei"ence, both testi-onial an" physical! The cre"ible an" categorical

testi-onies of t.o %(& eye.itnesses "uring the entire inci"ent on the night of $pril

5, 7++:, 'effrey an" Sher.in, positiely point to appellant as the one %7& .ho

"eliere" the single fatal stabbing blo. upon the icti- .hile the latter .as trying

to counter the assault of appellants brother, co;accuse" Ran"olf .ho .as then

hol"ing a bro8en bottle!1âwphi1 The lone 8nife thrust .as "irecte" at the heart of

the icti-, the .oun" penetrating sai" ital organ up to 7( centi-eters "eep, the

"irection, tra2ectory an" "epth of the stab .oun" clearly sho.ing the intent to 8ill

hi-! The -e"ico;legal fin"ings of Dr! $ranas sufficiently corroborate the account ofsai" eye.itnesses that the icti- .as attac8e" frontally an" the fatal stab .oun"

cause" by a single;bla"e" 8itchen 8nife such as the one %7& i"entifie" in court,

preiously i"entifie" by the .itness but only the photographs thereof .ere for-ally

offere" in ei"ence by the prosecution!

The totality of prosecution ei"ence -ore than satisfactorily proes the co--ission

of the offense an" appellants authorship thereof! Contrary to appellants contention,

the non;presentation of bloo" sa-ples fro- the icti- an" the accuse" as .ell as

the instru-ent .hich accuse" use" in perpetrating his felonious acts "o not negate

cri-inal liability it is enough for the prosecution to establish by the re>uire"

>uantu- of proof that a cri-e .as co--itte" an" the accuse" .as the author

thereof! The presentation of the .eapon is not a prere>uisite for coniction! Suchpresentation an" i"entification of the .eapon use" are not in"ispensable to proe

the guilt of the accuse" -uch -ore so .here the perpetrator has been positiely

i"entifie" by a cre"ible .itness! $ppellants insistence, therefore, that the

presentation of the t.o %(& 8nies .oul" proe his innocence is futile, irreleant an"

i--aterial, in the face of positie i"entification by t.o unbiase" an" cre"ible

eye.itnesses! Positie i"entification .here categorical an" consistent an" .ithout

any sho.ing of ill;-otie on the part of the eye.itnesses testifying on the -atter

preails oer a "enial! Denial being negatie ei"ence .hich is self;sering in

nature, cannot preail oer the positie i"entification of prosecution .itnesses! 3ore

so in this case .here the "efense of "enial is not corroborate" by "isintereste" an"

cre"ible .itnesses0 the -other of the accuse" .hose presence in the cri-e scene

.as not sufficiently establishe" an" #"gar #rro .hose testi-ony is foun" to be"oubtful an" not .ithout bias!7@

The non;i"entification an" non;presentation of the .eapon actually use" in the

8illing "i" not "i-inish the -erit of the coniction pri-arily because other

co-petent ei"ence an" the testi-onies of .itnesses ha" "irectly an" positiely

i"entifie" an" incri-inate" Ricar"o as the assailant of ino!7< Hence, the

establish-ent beyon" reasonable "oubt of Ricar"os guilt for the ho-ici"e "i" not

re>uire the pro"uction of the .eapon use" in the 8illing as ei"ence in court, for in

arriing at its fin"ings on the culpability of Ricar"o the RTC, li8e other trial courts,

clearly loo8e" at, consi"ere" an" appreciate" the entirety of the recor" an" the

ei"ence! 6or sure, the .eapon actually use" .as not in"ispensable consi"ering that

cri-e!7?

In a""ition, the .itnesses incri-inating Ricar"o .ere not only cre"ible but .ere not

sho.n to hae harbore" any ill;-otie to.ar"s hi-! They .ere surely entitle" to full

faith an" cre"it for those reasons, an" both the RTC an" the C$ "i" .ell in

accor"ing such cre"ence to the-! Their positie i"entification of hi- as the assailant

preaile" oer his -ere "enial, because such "enial, being negatie an" self;sering

ei"ence, .as un"esering of .eight by irtue of its lac8 of substantiation by clear

an" conincing proof !7: Hence, his "enial ha" no greater ei"entiary alue than the

affir-atie testi-onies of the cre"ible .itnesses presente" against hi-!7)

$n", thir"ly, Ricar"os attribution of serious error to the C$ for not appreciating the

2ustifying circu-stance of "efense of a relatie in his faor .as bereft of any

support fro- the recor"s!

In or"er that "efense of a relatie is to be appreciate" in faor of Ricar"o, the

follo.ing re>uisites -ust concur, na-ely0 %7& unla.ful aggression by the icti- %(&

reasonable necessity of the -eans e-ploye" to preent or repel the aggression

an" %5& in case the proocation .as gien by the person attac8e", that the person

-a8ing the "efense too8 no part in the proocation!7+ i8e in self;"efense, it is the

accuse" .ho carries the bur"en to proe conincingly the atten"ance an"

concurrence of these re>uisites because his inocation of this "efense a-ounts to

an a"-ission of haing inflicte" the fatal in2ury on the icti-!

In ino8ing "efense of a relatie, Ricar"o states that his i--e"iate i-pulse upon

seeing Ran"olf being attac8e" by ino .ith a 8nife .as to get his o.n .eapon an"

to ai" in the "efense of Ran"olf! But that theory .as inconsistent .ith his

"eclaration at the trial that inos fatal .oun" ha" been self;inflicte", as it

presupposes "irect responsibility for inflicting the -ortal .oun"! Thus, his "efense

.as un.orthy of belief "ue to its incongruity .ith hu-an eperience!

Verily, the issue of cre"ibility, .hen it is "ecisie of the guilt or innocence of the

accuse", is "eter-ine" by the confor-ity of the conflicting clai-s an" recollectionsof the .itnesses to co--on eperience an" to the obseration of -an8in" as

probable un"er the circu-stances! It has been appropriately e-phasi4e" that 9K.Le

hae no test of the truth of hu-an testi-ony, ecept its confor-ity to our

8no.le"ge, obseration, an" eperience! =hateer is repugnant to these belongs to

the -iraculous an" is outsi"e of 2u"icial cogni4ance!9(*

In fine, Ricar"o has not conince" the Court in this appeal that the RTC an" the C$

oerloo8e", or -isappreciate", or -isrea" so-e fact or circu-stance of .eight an"

conse>uence that .oul" hae change" the outco-e of the case in his faor!

The Court nee"s to raise the ciil in"e-nity fro- PS*,***!** to P:<,***!** in or"er

to confor- to the current 2u"icial policy on the -atter (7The other a.ar"s of ciil























to confor- to the current 2u"icial policy on the -atter! The other a.ar"s of ciil

liability are sustaine" because of the absence of any challenge against the-!

=H#R#6OR#, the Court D#NI#S the petition for reie. for its lac8 of -erit

$66IR3S the "ecision pro-ulgate" on 'uly :, (**5 in all respects, sub2ect to the

3ODI6IC$TION that the ciil in"e-nity is increase" to P:<,***!** an" ORD#RS the

petitioner to pay the costs of suit!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

Baguio City

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 1**0+0 April +, 2014

PEOPLE O$ T)E P)ILIPPINES, Petitioner,

s!ICENTE R. ESPINOSA &'( LIN"SE% UENAISTA, Respon"ents!

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

G.R. No. 1**23+

RAMON CAESAR T. RO!AS =or i?l= &'( & rpr';&;i> o= ; )EIRS

O$ RAMON RO!AS !R.,Petitioners,

s!

ICENTE R. ESPINOSA &'( LIN"SE% UENAISTA, Respon"ents!

D # C I S I O N KoLn 3ay (:, (**:, at aroun" +0** in the eening, KheL .as insi"e the co-poun"

sering beer to Vicente #spinosa 9$l"an9 Pa"illa an" 9#""ie9 $guillon %Barangay






CARPIO, J.:

The Case

Before this Court are consoli"ate" petitions for reie. file" un"er Rule @< of the

Rules of Court assailing the follo.ing Resolutions of the Court of $ppeals, Cebu City

%C$;Cebu& in C$;/!R! SP No! *<?7: entitle" 9The People of the Philippines, et al! !

'u"ge 6lorian /regory D! $bala2on et al!90 %a& the Resolution "ate" (7 'anuary (*77"is-issing the Petition for Certiorari %un"er Rule ?<& "ate" 7@ Dece-ber (*7*7 an"

%b& the Resolution "ate" 5 October (*77 "enying the 3otion for Reconsi"eration

"ate" (@ 6ebruary (*77 file" by the People of the Philippines!(

/!R! No! 7++*:* .as file" by the People of the Philippines %petitioner& represente"

by the Office of the Solicitor /eneral %OS/&, .hile /!R! No! 7++(5: .as file" by

Ra-on Caesar T! Ro2as, for hi-self an" as representatie of the heirs of Ra-on

Ro2as, 'r! %priate co-plainants&!

The 6acts

On (( 3ay (**), Ra-on Ro2as, 'r! %Ro2as&, the for-er Vice;3ayor of $2uy, Iloilo,

.as shot an" 8ille" in Sitio Casa-ata, Iloilo! Ro2as .as 2ogging .ith $r-an"o

Nacional %Nacional& .hen they -et t.o assailants ri"ing a -otorcycle! Ro2as .as

shot seeral ti-es resulting in his "eath! Nacional later testifie" that #"gar Cor"ero

%Cor"ero& shot Ro2as .hile Dennis Cartagena %Cartagena& "roe the -otorcycle!5

On (? 3ay (**), the $2uy 3unicipal Police Office file" a Co-plaint for 3ur"er

against Cor"ero an" Cartagena in the Iloilo Proincial Prosecutors Office, .hich .as

"oc8ete" as I!S! No! (**);)5<!@

$fter ea-ining the testi-onies of a""itional .itnesses, the $2uy 3unicipal Police

Office file" a secon" co-plaint on ( 'une (**) .hich inclu"e" Vicente #spinosa alias

9Bull"og9 an" in"sey Buenaista alias 9Bebe9 %respon"ents&!

#spinosa file" his Counter;$ffi"ait on (: 'une (**), "enying any inole-ent in

the 8illing!< In his Counter;$ffi"ait "ate" 5* 'une (**), Buenaista also clai-e"

that he "i" not participate in the 8illing!?

On 77 'uly (**), Renyl Iran, .ho clai-e" to be a for-er bo"yguar"1helper of

#spinosa, eecute" an affi"ait stating that he personally hear" Cartagena,

Buenaista an" other -e-bers of #spinosas staff planning the -ur"er of seeral

$2uy goern-ent officials! $ccor"ing to Iran0

sering beer to Vicente #spinosa, $l"an Pa"illa an" #""ie $guillon %Barangay

Eaga.a" an" Barangay Secretary of Barangay an2agan, $2uy, Iloilo&! $lso "rin8ing

.ith the- .ere Dennis Cartagena alias 9Totong9 an" in"sey Buenaista alias

9Bebe9 .ho acte" as bo"yguar"s of Vicente #spinosa "uring the last elections!

Vicente #spinosa, 9$l"an9 Pa"illa an" 9#""ie9 $guillon .ere tal8ing about the last

elections an" ho. they coul" get een at the group of 3ayor 'uancho $lare4 an"

Vice;3ayor Ra-on Ro2as, 'r! Then, as KIranL .as leaing their table after sering

the- beer, KheL clearly hear" Vicente #spinosa telling 9$l"an9 Pa"illa an" 9#""ie9

$guillon 9Ipatu-ba naton sila! Fnahon ta si Vice Ra-on9 %ets eli-inate the-! ets

get Vice Ra-on first!& Then KIranL KalsoL hear" Vicente #spinosa KsayL 9Ti ano Bebe8ag Totong, 8aya nyo si Vice9 %Ho. about it 9Bebe9 an" 9Patong9, can you "o it to

Vice&

In the eening of 'une 5*, (**: at the co-poun", KIranL notice" that Vicente

#spinosa .as angry! Then su""enly he calle" -e an" as8e" 9Eaya -o patyon si

'uancho9 %Can you 8ill 'uancho&, to .hich KIranL ans.ere" 9Noy, -aluoy 8a -an,

pangita;i lang sang iban "ira! In"i 8o 8aya!9 %Noy, hae pity, 2ust loo8 for other

persons! I cant "o it!& Vicente #spinosa then or"ere" -e to KlightL so-e 9p.itis9

%pyrotechnic roc8ets& an" ai- the- at the house of 'uancho $lare4 .hich is 2ust

(** -eters a.ay fro- the co-poun"! $s KIran fire"L the roc8ets to.ar"s the house

of 'uancho $lare4 Vicente #spinosa .as laughing an" en2oyingK!L:

The Iloilo Proincial Prosecutors Office reco--en"e" the filing of an Infor-ation for

3ur"er against Cor"ero an" Cartagena, but "is-isse" the case against respon"ents

in its Resolution "ate" 7( $ugust (**)! The Iloilo Proincial Prosecutors Office

foun" that there .as no probable cause against respon"ents0

The ei"ence sub-itte" falls short of the >uantu- of proof re>uire" for a fin"ing of

probable cause against Vicente #spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista! In"ee", it is

painful an" heartbrea8ing for the Ro2as fa-ily, ho.eer, the la. -ust at all ti-es be

sustaine"! $ll "oubts -ust be resole" in faor of the accuse"! The possibility of the

guilt of Vicente #spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista is not being rule" out, but the

principle that KtheL 9insufficiency of ei"ence -ust be resole" consistent .ith the

theory of innocence!9)

Thus, the priate co-plainants file" a petition for reie. .ith the Secretary of

'ustice on (< $ugust (**)! The petition clai-e" that the Iloilo Proincial

Prosecutors Office graely erre" in0

7! resoling the preli-inary inestigation base" on "egree of 9proof beyon"

reasonable "oubt9 rather than "egree of proof to establish 9probable

cause9 against the appellees

(! hol"ing that the ei"ence of the appellants are purely circu-stantial or

in"irect ei"ence

So-eti-e after the en" of the electionKsL in 3ay (**:!7(























in"irect ei"ence

5! refusing to gie "ue cre"ence to the straightfor.ar", can"i", positie

an", -ost i-portantly, unrebutte" "eclarations of the appellants

.itnesses, -anifesting a clear bias in faor of appellees Vicente #spinosa

an" in"sey Buenaista an"

@! fin"ing no probable cause against appellees Vicente #spinosa an"

in"sey Buenaentura!

+

3ean.hile, the Infor-ation for 3ur"er .as file" .ith the Regional Trial Court,

Branch ??, Barotac Vie2o, Iloilo %RTC;Branch ??&, .hich .as "oc8ete" as Cri-inal

Case No! (**);@5*5!7* The RTC;Branch ?? also issue" .arrants of arrest against

Cor"ero an" Cartagena!

On (+ $ugust (**), a group of ar-e" assailants shot Cartagena an" Cor"ero! =hile

Cartagena surie", Cor"ero "ie" of gunshot .oun"s! Cartagena .as arreste" an"

turne" oer to the custo"y of Col! Ricar"o Delapa4, Iloilo Philippine National Police

Proincial Director! Thereafter, he .as brought bac8 to Iloilo City!

In his s.orn state-ent77 "ate" @ Septe-ber (**), Cartagena a"-itte" that he .asinole" in the 8illing of Ro2as! Cor"ero shot Ro2as .hile Cartagena "roe the

-otorcycle! He also clai-e" that #spinosa pai" hi- an" Cor"ero for 8illing Ro2as!

Cartagena state"0

(7! Can you tell -e the reason .hy you an" #"gar Cor"ero shot V ice 3ayor Ro2as

Because Vicente 9#ti89 #spinosa alias 9Bull"og9 of Barangay an2agan, $2uy, Iloilo

pai" usK!L

((! Do you really 8no. Vicente 9#ti89 #spinosa alias 9Bull"og9

Ges! Because I .as one of his bo"yguar"s "uring the elections in 3ay (**:!

(5! Gou sai" that you are only one of his bo"yguar"s! KDLo you 8no. his other

bo"yguar"s

Ges! They are Rey Pea, in"sey Buenaista alias 9Bebe9 an" certain alias 9Re-y9!

(?! =hen "i" Vicente 9#ti89 #spinosa tell you to -ur"er Vice 3ayor Ro2as

Cartagena also clai-e" that it .as Buenaista .ho shot an" 8ille" Cor"ero on (+

$ugust (**)!75

=hile the petition for reie. file" by the priate co-plainants .as pen"ing, for-er

Secretary of 'ustice Raul 3! /on4ales issue" Depart-ent Or"er No! 5?* on 7@ 3ay

(**+ .hich create" a panel of state prosecutors acting as Proincial Prosecutor to

con"uct a ne. preli-inary inestigation of the Co-plaint for 3ur"er file" against

Cor"ero an" Cartagena!

7@

In its Resolution "ate" + October (**+, the panel foun" probable cause for 3ur"er

against respon"ents! #spinosa then file" a 3otion for Reconsi"eration!

On 7( October (**+, this Court grante" petitioners Frgent Petition for Change of

Venue in Cri-inal Case No! (**);@5*5 an" or"ere" the i--e"iate transfer of the

case fro- RTC;Branch ?? to the RTC;Branch 5), Iloilo City %RTC;Branch 5)&!7<

On (@ 6ebruary (*7*, for-er Secretary of 'ustice $gnes VST Deana"era "is-isse"

the priate co-plainants Petition for Reie.! The Resolution state" that in ie. of

the panels fin"ing that there is probable cause to charge respon"ents .ith 3ur"er,

the Petition for Reie. .as no. -oot!

In accor"ance .ith the Resolution "ate" (@ 6ebruary (*7*, then $cting Secretary of

'ustice $lberto C! $gra issue" Depart-ent Or"er No! @*+ "irecting the Regional

State Prosecutor of Iloilo, .ho .as "esignate" as $cting Proincial Prosecutor, to

9file an a-en"e" infor-ation for -ur"er in Cri-inal Case No! (**);@5*5, entitle"

People of the Philippines s! Dennis Cartagena an" #"gar Cor"ero!97? Thus, on 7@

'uly (*7*, the Regional State Prosecutor, Region VI, file" .ith the RTC;Branch 5) an

$-en"e" Infor-ation for 3ur"er in Cri-inal Case No! (**);@5*5!

On 7? 'uly (*7*, #spinosa file" a 3otion for 'u"icial Deter-ination of Probable

Cause!7: $ccor"ing to #spinosa0

the s.orn state-ent of Dennis Cartagena is only a"-issible against

Cartagena an" not against his co;accuse" or co;respon"ent! KTLhe

eclusionary rule on a"-ission an" on confession as proi"e" for un"er SectionKsL

5* an" 55 of the Rules of Court can be ino8e" "uring the preli-inary inestigation

an" reinestigation of a case!

KTLhe panel of inestigators oerstretche" their authority an" sho.e" -anifest

partiality an" bias, .hen in resoling the 3otion for Reconsi"eration file" by

respon"ent #spinosa, they too8 in consi"eration the affi"aits of Renyl Iran an"

6i"el aega! Sai" affi"aits .ere neer sub-itte" to the Panel by either party to

for- part of their ei"ence! The affiants .ere not een calle" to affir- their

The RTC "enie" the 3otion for Reconsi"eration in its Or"er "ate" : October (*7*!

The "ispositie portion thereof rea"s0



















for- part of their ei"ence! The affiants .ere not een calle" to affir- their

state-ents!7)

'u"ge 6lorian D! $bala2on %public respon"ent& issue" the >uestione" Or"er "ate" 7(

$ugust (*7* "is-issing the $-en"e" Infor-ation against respon"ents! $ccor"ing

to the RTC, 9stan"ing alone, the #tra;'u"icial Confession of accuse" Dennis

Cartagena as against his co;accuse" Vicente #spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista is

ina"-issible an" consi"ere" hearsay against the-!97+

The RTC applie" the res inter alios acta rule un"er Section 5*, Rule 75* of the Rules

of Court0

$"-ission by a Conspirator The act or "eclaration of a conspirator relating to the

conspiracy an" "uring its eistence, -ay be gien in ei"ence after the conspiracy is

sho.n by ei"ence other than such act or "eclaration!

The RTC eplaine" that0

In or"er that the a"-ission of a conspirator -ay be receie" against his or her

co;conspirators, it is necessary that0

a!& The conspiracy -ust first be proe" by ei"ence other than the

a"-ission itself

b!& The a"-ission relates to the co--on ob2ect an"

c!& It has been -a"e .hile the "eclarant .as engage" in carrying out the

conspiracy!

Consi"ering that the etra2u"icial confession of accuse" Dennis Cartagena is notcorroborate" by in"epen"ent ei"ence, it is therefore ina"-issible an" it .oul" be

unfair to hol" accuse" Vicente #spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista for trial!

Cartagenas confession is bin"ing only on hi- an" is not a"-issible against his co;

accuse" Vicente #spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista! By the rule, his confession is

consi"ere" hearsay against his co;accuse"!(*

Petitioner an" priate co-plainants file" an Frgent 3otion for Inhibition on (?

$ugust (*7* alleging that public respon"ent .as 9utterly one;si"e"9 in faor of the

accuse" an" 9oppressiely biase" against the co-plainants!9(7 $ 3otion for

Reconsi"eration .as later file" on (: $ugust (*7*!

The "ispositie portion thereof rea"s0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the -otion for reconsi"eration, the -otion for

inhibition an" -otion to epunge are hereby D#NI#D, respectiely!

HO=#V#R, in or"er to "iscontinue the lac8 of faith an" trust of co-plainants priate

an" public, an" petitioner on the i-partiality an" ob2ectiity of the Presi"ing 'u"ge,

he oluntarily inhibits hi-self fro- further hearing the case follo.ing the opinion of

the Supre-e Court that

9at the ery first sign of lac8 of faith an" trust in his actions, .hether .ell;groun"e"

or not, the 2u"ge has no other alternatie but to inhibit hi-self fro- the case!9

%/utang s! Court of $ppeals, /!R! No! 7(@:?*, 'uly ), 7++), (+( SCR$ :?&! On the

other han", the Supre-e Court cannot tolerate acts of litigants .ho for any

conceiable reason see8 to "is>ualify a 2u"ge for their o.n purposes un"er a plea of

bias, hostility, pre2u"ice or pre2u"g-ent!9 %People ! Serrano, /!R! No! @@:7(,

October (), 7++7, (*5 SCR$ 7:7&

et these cases be therefore returne"1for.ar"e" to the Office of the Cler8 of Court

for their proper "isposition by the #ecutie 'u"ge!

SO ORD#R#D!((

The Or"er .as receie" by priate co-plainants on 7@ October (*7*!(5 Then,

Cri-inal Case No! (**);@5*5 .as re;raffle" to RTC;Branch (@, Iloilo City %RTC;

Branch (@&!

$ggriee", the priate co-plainants sought to file a petition for certiorari un"er Rule

?<! $ccor"ing to the-, they coor"inate" .ith the Office of the Regional State

Prosecutor, Region VI, Iloilo City %Regional State Prosecutor& an" "rafte" the

petition for certiorari! $s ei"ence" by an In"orse-ent "ate" (< Noe-ber (*7*,

the Regional State Prosecutor for.ar"e" the "raft of the petition for certiorari to the

Office of the Prosecutor /eneral Claro $! $rellano! On 5* Noe-ber (*7*, counselfor priate co-plainants $tty! 3ehelin"a $! Penetrante %$tty! Penetrante& han";

"eliere" the0 %a& In"orse-ent %b& "raft of the Petition for Certiorari %c& original

pages containing the erification an" certification against foru-;shopping eecute"

on (? Noe-ber (*7* by priate co-plainant Ra-on Caesar T! Ro2as an" %"&

original copies containing the signatures of the priate prosecutors!(@

Priate co-plainants clai-e" that the "ocu-ents .ere trans-itte" to the Office of

Hon! $nsel-o I! Ca"i4, Solicitor /eneral, as ei"ence" by a letter "ate" 5*

Noe-ber (*7*! The letter erroneously state" that the "ea"line for filing .as 7@

Dece-ber (*7*, instea" of 75 Dece-ber (*7*! The letter .as receie" by the

Office of the Solicitor /eneral %OS/& on 5 Dece-ber (*7*!(< $ccor"ing to the OS/,

the case .as assigne" to the han"ling solicitors on ) Dece-ber (*7*!

On 7@ Dece-ber (*7*, the OS/ file" before the C$;Cebu a petition for certiorari

un"er Rule ?<! The OS/ allege" that public respon"ent co--itte" grae abuse of

5! the Petition faile" to incorporate therein a .ritten eplanation .hy the

preferre" personal -o"e of filing an" serice as -an"ate" un"er Section



















g p p g

"iscretion a-ounting to lac8 or ecess of 2uris"iction0

I! .hen he or"ere" the "is-issal of KtheL a-en"e" infor-ation

against accuse" #spinosa an" Buenaista "espite the Ketra2u"icialL

confession of their co;accuse" Dennis Cartagena an" corroborating

Kei"enceL on recor" establishing their participation in the cri-e charge"

II! in hol"ing that the Ketra2u"icialL confession of Cartagena isina"-issible un"er Section 5* of Rule 75* of the Rules of Court

III! for eclu"ing the etra2u"icial confession in his "eter-ination of

the assaile" or"ers!(?

Priate co-plainants clai-e" that they receie" a copy of the petition so-eti-e

aroun" (5 Dece-ber (*7*! They notice" that on Page 5+ of the Petition, the na-es

of respon"ents .ere not liste" as one of the parties furnishe" .ith a copy of the

plea"ing! Thus, $tty! Penetrante infor-e" the OS/ of the o-ission in a letter "ate"

7( 'anuary (*77!(:

The OS/, through $ssistant Solicitor /eneral %$S/& 'ohn #--anuel 6! 3a"a-baan" $ssociate Solicitor %$S& 3elissa $! Santos, assure" $tty! Penetrante that

respon"ents .ere furnishe" .ith copies of the petition! Ho.eer, 9the $ffi"ait of

Serice .as attache" to the original of the petition that .as file" .ith the Court of

$ppeals!9() The OS/ also state" that priate co-plainants .oul" be furnishe" .ith

the proof of serice to the priate respon"ents after receipt of the registry car"s

fro- the post office!

The Ruling of the Court of $ppeals

In its Resolution(+ "ate" (7 'anuary (*77, the C$;Cebu "is-isse" the petition!

$ccor"ing to the court a >uo0

$ perusal of the Petition reeale" there .ere congenital infir-ities0

7! the Petition .as file" one "ay after the ?*;"ay reglKeL-entary perio" for

filing the Petition for Certiorari, in iolation of Section @, Rule ?< of the

7++: Rules of Ciil Proce"ure

(! there .as no proper proof of serice of the Petition to the court a >uo

an" to priate respon"ents! Certainly, registry receipts can har"ly be

consi"ere" sufficient proof of receipt by the a""ressee of registere" -ailKL

p p g

77, Rule 75 of the 7++: Rules of Ciil Proce"ure .as not aaile" of! Verily,

the #planation referre" to W 3otion for #tension!!!

@! there .as no co-petent ei"ence regar"ing petitioners i"entity on the

attache" Verifications an" Certifications $gainst 6oru- Shopping as

re>uire" by Section 7(, Rule II of the (**@ Rules on Notarial Practice an"

<! the Notarial Certificate in the Verification an" Certification $gainst 6oru-Shopping of priate co-plainant "i" not contain the office a""ress of the

notary public, in iolation of Section (%c&, Rule VIII of the (**@ Rules on

Notarial Practice!5*

The petitioner an" priate co-plainants each file" a petition for reie. before this

Court!

The Issue

The basic issue raise" in both petitions is the propriety of the C$;Cebus "is-issal of

the OS/s petition for certiorari base" on proce"ural lapses!

The Ruling of this Court

=e note that the OS/ faile" to follo. proce"ural rules! 6irst, it a"-itte" that it

erroneously co-pute" the "ea"line for filing the petition! Secon", the respon"ents

.ere furnishe" a copy of the petition after its filing! Thir", the #planation re>uire"

un"er Section 77, Rule 75 referre" to a 3otion for #tension an" not a Petition for

Certiorari!

The C$;Cebu "is-isse" the Petition for Certiorari because of these proce"ural

errors! Petitioner an" priate co-plainants clai- that the rigi" technical rules shoul"

hae been relae" by the C$;Cebu in ie. of the circu-stances of the case!

Courts are constraine" to a"here to proce"ural rules un"er the Rules of Court!

Section ? of Rule 7, ho.eer, grants courts lee.ay in interpreting an" applying

rules0

Sec! ?! Construction! ; These Rules shall be liberally construe" in or"er to pro-ote

their ob2ectie of securing a 2ust, spee"y an" inepensie "isposition of eery action

an" procee"ing!

Ho.eer, .e shoul" point out that courts are not gien carte blanche authority to

interpret rules liberally! In Buil"ing Care Corporation ! 3acaraeg,57 .e pointe" out

that0

the resort to a liberal application, or suspension of the application of

proce"ural rules, -ust re-ain as the eception to the .ell;settle" principle that

5! goo" faith of the "efaulting party by i--e"iately paying .ithin a

reasonable ti-e fro- the ti-e of the "efault

















p , p p p

rules -ust be co-plie" .ith for the or"erly a"-inistration of 2ustice!5(

The first proce"ural error .as the failure to file the petition .ithin the regle-entary

perio"! Section @ of Rule ?< of the Rules of Court, as a-en"e" un"er $!3! No! *:;:;

7(;SC, proi"es a strict "ea"line for the filing of petitions for certiorari0

S#CTION @! =hen an" =here to 6ile the Petition! The petition shall be file" not

later than sity %?*& "ays fro- notice of the 2u"g-ent, or"er or resolution! In casea -otion for reconsi"eration or ne. trial is ti-ely file", .hether such -otion is

re>uire" or not, the petition shall be file" not later than sity %?*& "ays counte"

fro- the notice of the "enial of the -otion!

=e "elete" the clause in Section @, Rule ?< that per-itte" etensions of the perio"

to file petitions for certiorari, since sity %?*& "ays is -ore than a-ple ti-e to

sufficiently prepare for filing!55

Ho.eer, in Republic ! St! Vincent "e Paul Colleges, Inc!,5@ .e allo.e" a liberal

interpretation of the foregoing rule0

Neertheless, in the -ore recent case of Do-"o- ! San"iganbayan, .e rule" that

the "eletion of the clause in Section @, Rule ?< by $!3! No! *:;:;7(;SC "i" not, ipso

facto, -a8e the filing of a -otion for etension to file a Rule ?< petition absolutely

prohibite"! =e hel" in Do-"o- that if absolute proscription .ere inten"e", the

"elete" portion coul" hae 2ust si-ply been re.or"e" to specifically prohibit an

etension of ti-e to file such petition! Thus, because of the lac8 of an epress

prohibition, .e hel" that -otions for etension -ay be allo.e", sub2ect to this

Courts soun" "iscretion, an" only un"er eceptional an" -eritorious cases!

In"ee", .e hae relae" the proce"ural technicalities intro"uce" un"er $!3! No! *:;

:;7(;SC in or"er to sere substantial 2ustice an" safeguar" strong publicinterest!5< %#-phasis supplie"&

The ?*;"ay perio" -ay be eten"e" un"er any of the circu-stances proi"e" in the

earlier case of abao ! 6lores!5? The recogni4e" eceptions are0

7! -ost persuasie an" .eighty reasons

(! to reliee a litigant fro- an in2ustice not co--ensurate .ith his failure

to co-ply .ith the prescribe" proce"ure

@! the eistence of special or co-pelling circu-stances

<! the -erits of the case

?! a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party

faore" by the suspension of the rules

:! a lac8 of any sho.ing that the reie. sought is -erely friolous an"

"ilatory

)! the other party .ill not be un2ustly pre2u"ice" thereby

+! frau", acci"ent, -ista8e or ecusable negligence .ithout appellants

fault

7*! peculiar legal an" e>uitable circu-stances atten"ant to each case

77! in the na-e of substantial 2ustice an" fair play

7(! i-portance of the issues inole" an"

75! eercise of soun" "iscretion by the 2u"ge gui"e" by all the atten"ant

circu-stances! Thus, there shoul" be an effort on the part of the party

ino8ing liberality to a"ance a reasonable or -eritorious eplanation for

his1her failure to co-ply .ith the rules!5:

In the instant case, priate co-plainants ha" to trans-it "ocu-ents to the OS/!

Recor"s clearly sho. that they .ere able to "o so pro-ptly! On 5* Noe-ber (*7*,

counsel for priate co-plainants $tty! Penetrante sub-itte" to the Office of the

Prosecutor /eneral the "raft petition for certiorari, the erification an" certificationagainst foru- shopping, the original copies containing the signatures of the priate

prosecutors, an" the certifie" copies of the annees!5) These "ocu-ents .ere

receie" by the OS/ on 5 Dece-ber (*7* only!

/ien the circu-stances, .e hol" that the C$;Cebu shoul" hae applie" the rules

liberally an" ecuse" the belate" filing!

=e no. "iscuss the re-aining proce"ural errors! Respon"ents .ere furnishe" a

copy of the petition after it .as file"! $ccor"ing to respon"ents, this iolate" Section

7, Rule ?< an" Section 5, Rule @? of the Rules of Court! The C$;Cebu also foun"

that the petition lac8e" a .ritten eplanation as re>uire" un"er Section 77, Rule 75

of the Rules of Court! The #planation attache" to the file" petition referre" to a

3otion for #tension an" not a Petition for Certiorari! The C$;Cebu rule" that there

.as no proper proof of serice of the petition to the court a >uo an" to priate

personal serice of the petition on the respon"ents .as not resorte" to .ere all in

the han"s of the OS/! KTheseL .ere beyon" the control or interention of the



















respon"ents! It hel" that 9registry receipts can har"ly be consi"ere" sufficient proof

of receipt by the a""ressee of registere" -ail!9

Section 75 of Rule 75 of the Rules of Court states that for plea"ings sere" through

registere" -ail, proof of serice shall be -a"e through an affi"ait of the person

-ailing the plea"ing, an" the registry receipts issue" by the post office! The OS/

.as re-iss in its "uties as counsel .hen it faile" to sere a copy to respon"ents

before filing of the petition! $s regar"s the #planation, it is clear that the erroneous

referral to a 93otion for #tension9 instea" of a Petition for Certiorari .as 2ust a

-ere typographical error!

=hile .e ac8no.le"ge that the OS/ co--itte" glaring errors, .e "ee- it un2ust to

penali4e priate co-plainants for the OS/s carelessness! It is i-portant to point

out that priate co-plainants >uic8ly infor-e" the OS/ of the oersight0

On or about Dece-ber (5, (*7*, the priate prosecutors in Iloilo City receie" by

registere" -ail copies of the petition for Certiorari signe" by $S 3elissa $!

Santos an" $ssistant Solicitor /eneral 'ohn #--anuel 6! 3a"a-ba .hich appeare"

to hae been file" .ith the Honorable Court through registere" -ail on Dece-ber

7@, (*7*

It .as then that the priate prosecutors notice" on Page 5+ of the petition un"er

the 9Copy furnishe"09 portion that the na-es of the priate respon"ents Vicente

#spinosa an" in"sey Buenaista .ere not a-ong the list of parties .ho .ere

furnishe" .ith copies of the petition as re>uire" by Rule ?<! The copies sent to the

priate prosecutors also "i" not inclu"e a copy of the OS/s $ffi"ait of Serice!

Thereupon, $tty! Penetrante in a letter "ate" 'anuary 7(, (*77 brought this -atter

to the attention of the OS/ thru $S/ 'ohn #--anuel 6! 3a"a-ba as $S 3elissa $!

Santos !

Thereafter, in a reply letter "ate" 'anuary 7@, (*77 $S/ 3a"a-ba an" $S Santos

infor-e" $tty! Penetrante %a& that they hae actually furnishe" the priate

respon"ents .ith copies of the petition but the $ffi"ait of Serices .as attache" to

the original of the petition that .as f ile" .ith the KC$;CebuL, an" %b& that they .ill

thereafter furnish her .ith the proof of serice to priate respon"ents as soon as

they hae receie" the registry return receipts fro- the post office! ! 5+

$s correctly pointe" out by priate co-plainants0

In"ee" the actual "ate of f iling of the petition as .ell as co-pliance .ith the rest of

the for-al an" proce"ural re>uire-ents of a petition for Certiorari un"er Rule ?<,

na-ely OS/s erification an" certification on non;foru- shopping, the 9Copy

6urnishe"9 portion sho.ing serice of copies of the petition on the public an"

priate respon"entKsL by registere" -ail an" the re>uire" 9#planation9 .hy

priate petitioners an" priate prosecutors! $fter all, the OS/ Kis theL chief legal

counsel of the State an" the People of the Philippines in the Court of $ppeals an"

the Supre-e Court!@*

It .oul" be un2ust to penali4e priate co-plainants for the negligence of the

OS/!1awp++i1 In 3ulti;Trans $gency Phils!, Inc! ! Oriental $ssurance Corp!,@7 .e

"iscusse" the general rule an" eceptions .ith respect to the effect of counsels

negligence on a client0

K=Lhile it is settle" that negligence of counsel bin"s the client, this rule is not

.ithout eception! In cases .here rec8less or gross negligence of counsel, li8e in

this case, "epries the client of "ue process of la., or .hen the application .oul"

result in outright "epriation of the clients liberty or property, or .here the interest

of 2ustice so re>uires, relief is accor"e" to the client .ho suffere" by reason of the

la.yers gross or palpable -ista8e or negligence!@(

The case of Buil"ing Care inole" an appeal .hich .as file" out of ti-e because of

counsels negligence! =e "isallo.e" the belate" filing because

respon"ent nor her for-er counsel gae any eplanation or reason citingetraor"inary circu-stances for her la.yers failure to abi"e by the rules for filing

an appeal! Respon"ent -erely insiste" that she ha" not been re-iss in follo.ing up

her case .ith sai" la.yer!@5

The circu-stances in Buil"ing Care are clearly "ifferent fro- the facts of this case!

In the present case, there .as a transfer of "ocu-ents fro- priate co-plainants

original counsel, $tty! Penetrante to the OS/! This Court has al.ays recogni4e" the

fact that the OS/ has a heay .or8loa"! 6urther, the OS/ only receie" the

"ocu-ents on 5 Dece-ber (*7* "espite pro-pt sub-ission of the re>uire"

"ocu-ents!

=H#R#6OR#, the Resolutions of the Court of $ppeals;Cebu "ate" (7 'anuary (*77an" 5 October (*77 are hereby S#T $SID#! The case is R#3$ND#D to the Court of

$ppeals .hich is DIR#CT#D to reinstate an" gie "ue course to the petition for

reie. in C$;/!R! SP No! *<?7: an" to "eci"e the sa-e on the -erits!

SO ORD#R#D!

9$-ong the "uties assu-e" by the husban" are his "uties to loe, cherish an"

protect his .ife, to gie her a ho-e, to proi"e her .ith the co-forts an" the

















SUPREME COURTBaguio City

6IRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 1+4*5 April 21, 2014


s!

E"GAR !UMAWAN, $ccuse";$ppellant!

D # C I S I O N

necessities of life .ithin his -eans, to treat her 8in"ly an" not cruelly or

inhu-anely! He is boun" to honor her it is his "uty not only to -aintain an"

support her, but also to protect her fro- oppression an" .rong!97

RE%ES, J.:

Husban"s "o not hae property rights oer their .iesA bo"ies! Seual intercourse,

albeit .ithin the real- of -arriage, if not consensual, is rape! This is the clear State

policy epressly legislate" in Section (??;$ of the Reise" Penal Co"e %RPC&, as

a-en"e" by Republic $ct %R!$!& No! )5<5 or the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:!

The Case

This is an auto-atic reie.( of the Decision5 "ate" 'uly +, (**) of the Court of

$ppeals %C$& in C$;/!R! CR;HC No! **5<5, .hich affir-e" the 'u"g-ent@ "ate"

$pril 7, (**( of the Regional Trial Court %RTC& of Cagayan "e Oro City, Branch 7+, in

Cri-inal Case Nos! ++;??) an" ++;??+ conicting hi- to suffer the penalty of

reclusion perpetua for each count!

The 6acts

$ccuse";appellant an" his .ife, EEE,< .ere -arrie" on October 7), 7+:<! They Ii

e" together since then an" raise" their four %@& chil"ren? as they put up seeral

businesses oer the years!

On 6ebruary 7+, 7+++, EEE eecute" a Co-plaint;$ffi"ait,: alleging that her

husban", the accuse";appellant, rape" her at 5 0** a!-! of Dece-ber 5, 7++) at

their resi"ence in Phase (, Villa #rnesto, /usa, Cagayan "e Oro City, an" that on

Dece-ber 7(, 7++), the accuse";appellant boe" her shoul"er for refusing to hae

se .ith hi-!

On 'une 77, 7+++, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Cagayan "e Oro City issue" a'oint Resolution,) fin"ing probable cause for grae threats, less serious physical

in2uries an" rape an" reco--en"ing that the appropriate cri-inal infor-ation be

file" against the accuse";appellant!

On 'uly 7?, 7+++, t.o Infor-ations for rape .ere file" before the RTC respectiely

"oc8ete" as Cri-inal Case No! ++;??)+ an" Cri-inal Case No! ++;??+!7* The

Infor-ation in Cri-inal Case No! ++;??) charge" the accuse";appellant as follo.s0

That on or about 7*05* in the eening -ore or less, of October +, 7++), at /usa,

Cagayan "e Oro City, Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court,

the aboe;na-e" accuse" by -eans of force upon person "i" then an" there

.ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously hae carnal 8no.le"ge .ith the priate

co-plainant, her KsicL .ife, against the latterKALs .ill!

carnal 8no.le"ge .ith the priate co-plainant, his .ife, KEEEL, against the latterAs

.ill!



























Contrary to an" in Violation of R!$! )5<5, the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:!

3ean.hile the Infor-ation in Cri-inal Case No! ++;??+ rea"s0

That on or about 7*05* in the eening -ore or less, of October 7*, 7++), at /usa,

Cagayan "e Oro City, Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court,

the aboe;na-e" accuse" by -eans of force upon person "i" then an" there.ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously hae carnal 8no.le"ge .ith the priate

co-plainant, her KsicL .ife, against the latterAs .ill!

Contrary to an" in Violation of R!$! )5<5, the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:!

The accuse";appellant .as arreste" upon a .arrant issue" on 'uly (7, 7+++!77 On

$ugust 7), 7+++, the accuse";appellant file" a 3otion for Reinestigation,7( .hich

.as "enie" by the trial court in an Or"er75 "ate" $ugust 7+, 7+++! On een "ate,

the accuse";appellant .as arraigne" an" he entere" a plea of not guilty to both

charges!7@

On 'anuary 7*, (***, the prosecution file" a 3otion to $"-it $-en"e"Infor-ation7< aerring that the na-e of the priate co-plainant .as o-itte" in the

original infor-ations for rape! The -otion also state" that EEE, thru a Supple-ental

$ffi"ait "ate" Noe-ber 7<, 7+++,7? atteste" that the true "ates of co--ission of

the cri-e are October 7?, 7++) an" October 7 :, 7++) thereby -o"ifying the "ates

state" in her preious co-plaint;affi"ait! The -otion .as grante" on 'anuary 7),

(***!7: $ccor"ingly, the cri-inal infor-ations .ere a-en"e" as follo.s0

Cri-inal Case No! ++;??)0

That on or about October 7?, 7++) at /usa, Cagayan "e Oro City, Philippines, an"

.ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e" accuse" by -eans

of force upon person "i" then an" there .ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously haecarnal 8no.le"ge .ith the priate co-plainant, his .ife, KEEEL, against the latterAs

.ill!

Contrary to an" in iolation of R!$! )5<5, the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:!7)

Cri-inal Case No! ++;??+0

That on or about October 7:, 7++) at /usa, Cagayan "e Oro City, Philippines, an"

.ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e" accuse" by -eans

of force upon person "i" then an" there .ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously hae

Contrary to an" in iolation of R!$! )5<5, the $nti;Rape a. of 7++:!7+

The accuse";appellant .as thereafter re;arraigne"! He -aintaine" his not guilty

plea to both in"ict-ents an" a 2oint trial of the t.o cases forth.ith ensue"!

Version of the prosecution

The prosecutionAs theory .as anchore" on the testi-onies of EEE, an" her

"aughters 333 an" ***, .hich, together .ith pertinent physical ei"ence, "epicte"

the follo.ing eents0

EEE -et the accuse";appellant at the far- of her parents .here his father .as one

of the laborers! They got -arrie" after a year of courtship!(* =hen their first chil",

333, .as born, EEE an" the accuse";appellant put up a sari;sari store!(7 ater on,

they engage" in seeral other businesses ;truc8ing, rice -ill an" har".are! EEE

-anage" the businesses ecept for the rice -ill, .hich, i"eally, .as un"er the

accuse";appellantAs superision .ith the help of a truste" e-ployee! In reality,

ho.eer, he -erely assiste" in the rice -ill business by occasionally "riing one of

the truc8s to haul goo"s!((

$ccuse";appellantAs 8eenness to -a8e the businesses flourish .as not as ferent as

EEEAs "e"ication! #en the "aughters obsere" the "isproportionate labors of their

parents!(5 He .oul" "rie the truc8s so-eti-es but EEE .as the one .ho actiely

-anage" the businesses!(@

She .ante" to proi"e a co-fortable life for their chil"ren he, on the other han",

"i" not ac>uiesce .ith that ob2ectie!(<

In 7++@, EEE an" the accuse";appellant bought a lot an" built a house in Villa

#rnesto, /usa, Cagayan "e Oro City!(? Three of the chil"ren transferre" resi"ence

therein .hile EEE, the accuse";appellant an" one of their sons staye" inDangcagan, Bu8i"non! She shuttle" bet.een the t.o places regularly an"

so-eti-es he acco-panie" her!(: In 7++), EEE staye" in /usa, Cagayan De Oro

City -ost of the "ays of the .ee8!() On =e"nes"ays, she .ent to Dangcagan,

Bu8i"non to procure supplies for the fa-ily store an" then returne" to Cagayan "e

Oro City on the sa-e "ay!(+

Con2ugal inti-acy "i" not really cause -arital proble-s bet.een EEE an" the

accuse";appellant! It .as, in fact, both fre>uent an" fulfilling! He treate" her .ell

an" she, of course, respon"e" .ith e>ual "egree of enthusias-!5*Ho.eer, in 7++:,

he starte" to be brutal in be"! He .oul" i--e"iately re-oe her panties an", sans

any foreplay, insert her penis in her agina! His abri"ge" -etho" of loe-a8ing .as

physically painful for her so she .oul" resist his seual a-bush but he .oul"

threaten her into sub-ission!57

continue" to protest by "esperately shouting0 9KDLon At "o that to -e because IA-

not feeling .ell!9@(






















































In 7++), EEE an" the accuse";appellant starte" >uarrelling usually upon his

co-plaint that she faile" to atten" to hi-! She .as preoccupie" .ith financial

proble-s in their businesses an" a ban8 loan! He .ante" EEE to stay at ho-e

because 9a .o-an -ust stay in the house an" only goo" in be" %sic& !9 She

"isobeye" his .ishes an" focuse" on her goal of proi"ing a goo" future for the

chil"ren!5(

6our "ays before the sub2ect rape inci"ents or on October 7(, 7++), EEE an" the

accuse";appellant slept together in Cebu City .here the gra"uation rites of their

el"est "aughter .ere hel"! By October 7@, 7++), the three of the- .ere alrea"y

bac8 in Cagayan "e Oro City!55

On October 7?, 7++), the accuse";appellant, his .ife EEE an" their chil"ren .ent

about their nightly routine! The fa-ily store in their resi"ence .as close" at about

+0** p!-! before supper .as ta8en! $fter.ar"s, EEE an" the chil"ren .ent to the

girlsA be"roo- at the -e44anine of the house to pray the rosary .hile the accuse";

appellant .atche" teleision in the liing roo-!5@ OOO an" 333 then prepare" their

be"s! Soon after, the accuse";appellant fetche" EEE an" bi" her to co-e .ith hi-

to their con2ugal be"roo- in the thir" floor of the house! EEE co-plie"!5<

Once in the be"roo-, EEE change" into a "aster an" fie" the -atri-onial be" but

she "i" not lie thereon .ith the accuse";appellant an" instea", reste" separately in

a cot near the be"! Her reclusie behaior pro-pte" hi- to as8 angrily0 9K=Lhy are

you lying on the cXoLtKL9, an" to instantaneously or"er0 9Gou transfer here KtoL our

be"!95?

EEE insiste" to stay on the cot an" eplaine" that she ha" hea"ache an" ab"o-inal

pain "ue to her forthco-ing -enstruation! Her reasons "i" not appease hi- an" he

got angrier! He rose fro- the be", lifte" the cot an" thre. it against the .all

causing EEE to fall on the f loor! Terrifie", EEE stoo" up fro- .here she fell, too8

her pillo. an" transferre" to the be"!5:

The accuse";appellant then lay besi"e EEE an" not before long, epresse" his

"esire to copulate .ith her by tapping his fingers on her lap! She politely "ecline"

by .ar"ing off his han" an" reiterating that she .as not feeling .ell!5)

The accuse";appellant again asserte" his seual yearning an" .hen EEE trie" to

resist by hol"ing on to her panties, he pulle" the- "o.n so forcefully they tore on

the si"es!5+ EEE staye" "efiant by refusing to ben" her legs!@*

The accuse";appellant then raise" EEEAs "aster,@7 stretche" her legs apart an"

reste" his o.n legs on the-! She trie" to .restle hi- a.ay but he hel" her han"s

an" succee"e" in penetrating her! $s he .as carrying out his carnal "esires, EEE

=ith a concrete .all on one si"e an" a -ere .oo"en partition on the other

enclosing the spousesA be"roo-,@5EEEAs pleas .ere au"ible in the chil"renAs

be"roo- .here 333 lay a.a8e!

Fpon hearing her -other crying an" hysterically shouting0 9#""ie, "onAt "o that to

-e, hae pity on -e,9@@ 333 .o8e up *** .ho pro""e" her to go to their parentsA

roo-!@< 333 hurrie"ly cli-be" upstairs, igorously 8noc8e" on the "oor of her

parentsA be"roo- an" in>uire"0 9Pa, .hy is it that 3a-a is crying9@? The accuse";

appellant then >uic8ly put on his briefs an" shirt, partly opene" the "oor an" sai"0

9KDLon At interfere because this is a fa-ily trouble,9 before closing it again!@: Since

she hear" her -other continue to cry, 333 ignore" his fatherAs a"-onition,

8noc8e" at the be"roo- "oor again, an" then 8ic8e" it!@) $ furious accuse";

appellant opene" the "oor .i"er an" rebu8e" 333 once -ore0 9DonAt interfere us!

/o "o.nstairs because this is fa-ily troubleU9 Fpon seeing EEE crouching an"

crying on top of the be", 333 bol"ly entere" the roo-, approache" her -other an"

as8e"0 93a, .hy are you crying9 before as8ing her father0 9Pa, .hat happene" to

3a-a .hy is it that her un"er.ear is tornKL9@+

=hen 333 receie" no "efinite ans.ers to her >uestions, she helpe" her -other

get up in or"er to bring her to the girlsA be"roo-! EEE then pic8e" up her to-

un"er.ear an" coere" herself .ith a blan8et!<* Ho.eer, their brea8out fro- the

roo- .as not easy! To preent EEE fro- leaing, the accuse";appellant bloc8e" the

"oor.ay by eten"ing his ar- to.ar"s the 8nob! He co--an"e" EEE to 9KSLtay

here, you sleep in our roo-,9 .hen the tre-bling EEE plea"e"0 9#""ie, allo. -e to

go out!9 He then hel" EEEAs han"s but she pulle" the- bac8! Deter-ine" to get

a.ay, 333 leane" against "oor an" e-brace" her -other tightly as they pushe"

their .ay out!<7

In their be"roo-, the girls gae their -other so-e .ater an" >uerie" her as to

.hat happene"!<( EEE relaye"0 9KGLour father is an ani-al, a beast he force" -e to

hae se .ith hi- .hen IA- not feeling .ell!9 The girls then loc8e" the "oor an" let

her rest!9<5

The accuse";appellantAs aggression recurre" the follo.ing night! $fter closing the

fa-ily store on October 7:, 7++), EEE an" the chil"ren too8 their supper! The

accuse";appellant "i" not 2oin the- since, accor"ing to hi-, he alrea"y ate "inner

else.here! $fter resting for a short .hile, EEE an" the chil"ren procee"e" to the

girlsA be"roo- an" praye" the rosary! EEE "eci"e" to spen" the night in the roo-As

s-all be" an" the girls .ere alrea"y fiing the be""ings .hen the accuse";appellant

entere"!

9=hy are you sleeping in the roo- of our chil"ren9, he as8e" EEE, .ho respon"e"

that she preferre" to sleep .ith the chil"ren!<@ He then scoffe"0 9Its alright if you

.ill not go .ith -e, any.ay, there are .o-en that coul" be pai" KPL 7,***!**!9 She

"is-isse" his co--ent by turning her hea" a.ay after retorting0 9So be it!9 $fter

h h l f h <<

rice -ill -anage" by the accuse";appellant! He also "roe their truc8s that haule"

coffee, copra, or co-!?5






















































that, he left the roo-!<<

He returne" 7< -inutes later<? an" .hen EEE still refuse" to go .ith hi-, he

beca-e infuriate"! He lifte" her fro- the be" an" atte-pte" to carry her out of the

roo- as he eclai-e"0 9=hy .ill you sleep hereKL ets go to our be"roo-!9 =hen

she "efie" hi-, he grabbe" her short pants causing the- to tear apart!<: $t this

point, 333 interfere", 9Pa, "onAt "o that to 3a-a because .e are in front of you!9<)

The presence of his chil"ren apparently "i" not pacify the accuse";appellant .ho

yelle", 9K#Len in front of you, I can hae se of your -other Ksic ' because IA- the

hea" of the fa-ily!9 He then or"ere" his "aughters to leae the roo-! 6rightene",

the girls oblige" an" .ent to the staircase .here they subse>uently hear" the pleas

of their helpless -other resonate .ith the crea8ing be"!<+

The episo"es in the be"roo- .ere no less "isturbing! The accuse";appellant forcibly

pulle" EEEAs short pants an" panties! He pai" no hee" as she begge", 9KDLon At "o

that to -e, -y bo"y is still aching an" also -y ab"o-en an" I cannot "o .hat you

.ante" -e to "o KsicL! I cannot .ithstan" se!9?*

$fter re-oing his o.n short pants an" briefs, he flee" her legs, hel" her han"s,-ounte" her an" force" hi-self insi"e her! Once gratifie", the accuse";appellant

put on his short pants an" briefs, stoo" up, an" .ent out of the roo- laughing as

he conceite"ly uttere"0 9KILt s nice, that is .hat you "esere because you are KaL

flirt or fon" of se!9 He then retreate" to the -astersA be"roo-!?7

Sensing that the co--otion in their be"roo- has cease", 333 an" OOO scurrie"

upstairs but foun" the "oor loc8e"! 333 pulle" out a 2alousie .in"o., inserte" her

ar-, reache" for the "oor8nob insi"e an" "isengage" its loc8! Fpon entering the

roo-, 333 an" OOO foun" their -other crouche" on the be" .ith her hair

"isheele"! The girls as8e"0 93a, .hat happene" to you, .hy are you crying9 EEE

replie"0 9KGYour father is a beast an" ani-al, he again force" -e to hae se .ith

hi- een if I "onAt feel .ell! 9?(

Version of the "efense

The "efense spun a "ifferent tale! The accuse";appellantAs father o.ne" a lan"

a"2acent to that of EEEAs father! He ca-e to 8no. EEE because she brought foo"

for her fatherAs laborers! =hen they got -arrie" on October 7), 7+:<, he .as a

high school gra"uate .hile she .as an ele-entary gra"uate!

Their hu-ble e"ucational bac8groun" "i" not "eter the- fro- pursuing a

co-fortable life! Through their 2oint har" .or8 an" efforts, the couple gra"ually

ac>uire" personal properties an" establishe" their o.n businesses that inclu"e" a

The accuse";appellant "enie" raping his .ife on October 7? an" 7:, 7++)! He

clai-e" that on those "ates he .as in Dangcagan, Bu8i"non, peeling co-! On

October :, his truc8 -et an acci"ent so-e.here in $ngeles Ranch, 3alu8o, 3anolo

6ortich, Bu8i"non! He left the truc8 by the roa"si"e because he ha" to atten" 333As

gra"uation in Cebu on October 7( .ith EEE! =hen they returne" to Bu8i"non on

October 7@, he as8e" EEE an" 333 to procee" to Cagayan "e Oro City an" 2ust

leae hi- behin" so he can ta8e care of the truc8 an" buy so-e co-!?@

Ryle #>uia %#>uia&, the spousesA "rier fro- 'anuary 7++? until 'une 7+++

corroborate" the aboe clai-s! $ccor"ing to hi-, on October 7?, 7++), the

accuse";appellant .as .ithin the icinity of the rice -illAs loa"ing area in

Dangcagan, Bu8i"non, cleaning a pic8;up truc8! On October 7:, 7++), he an" the

accuse";appellant .ere in Dangcagan, Bu8i"non, loa"ing sac8s of co- into the

truc8! They finishe" loa"ing at 5 0** p!-! The accuse";appellant then instructe"

#>uia to procee" to 3alu8o, 3anolo 6ortich, Bu8i"non .hile the for-er atten"e" a

fiesta in Ne. Cebu, Eianggat, Dangcagan, Bu8i"non! $t aroun" @0** p!-!, #>uia,

together .ith a helper an" a -echanic, left for 3alu8o in or"er to to. the stalle"

truc8 left there by the accuse";appellant in October : an" thereafter, bring it to

Cagayan "e Oro City together .ith the separate truc8 loa"e" .ith co-!

They arrie" in 3alu8o at :0** p!-! an" it too8 the- three hours to turn the truc8

aroun" an" hoist it to the to.ing bar of the other truc8! $t aroun" 7*0** p!-!, the

accuse";appellant arrie" in 3alu8o! The four of the- then procee"e" to Cagayan

"e Oro City .here they arrie" at 5 0** a!-! of October 7), 7++)! The accuse";

appellant .ent to /usa .hile the other three -en brought the "a-age" truc8 to

Cug-an!?<

The accuse";appellant asserte" that EEE -erely fabricate" the rape charges as her

reenge because he too8 oer the control an" -anage-ent of their businesses as

.ell as the possession of their pic8;up truc8 in 'anuary 7+++! The accuse";appellant

.as proo8e" to "o so .hen she faile" to account for their ban8 "eposits an"

business earnings! The entries in their ban8 account sho.e" the balanceof P5,7+*,<5+!)5 on October 57, 7++? but after only a -onth or on Noe-ber 5*,

7++?, the a-ount ".in"le" to a -easly P+,)+@!))!?? Her failure to i--e"iately

report to the police also belies her rape allegations!?:

EEE .ante" to coer;up her etra;-arital affairs, .hich the accuse";appellant

gra"ually "etecte" fro- her o"" behaior! =hile in Cebu on October 7(, 7++) for

333As gra"uation rites, the accuse";appellant an" EEE ha" seual intercourse! He

.as surprise" .hen his .ife as8e" hi- to get a nap8in to .ipe her after haing se!

He tagge" her re>uest as 9high;tech,9 because they "i" not "o the sa-e .hen they

ha" se in the past! EEE ha" also beco-e increasingly in"ifferent to hi-! =hen he

arries ho-e, it .as an e-ployee, not her, .ho opene" the "oor an" .elco-e"





























The "elay in the f iling of the rape co-plaint .as sufficiently eplaine" by EEE .hen

she state" that she only foun" out that a .ife -ay charge his husban" .ith rape

hen the fiscal in estigating he sepa ate co-plaint fo g a e th eats an" ph sical

=o-en .ere sub2ugate" in la.s an" society as ob2ects or goo"s an" such treat-ent

.as 2ustifie" un"er three i"eologies!



.hen the fiscal inestigating her separate co-plaint for grae threats an" physical

in2uries tol" her about it!

6inally, the C$ "is-isse" the accuse";appellantAs alibi for lac8 of conincing

ei"ence that it .as physically i-possible for hi- to be at his resi"ence in Cagayan

"e Oro City at the ti-e of the co--ission of the cri-es, consi"ering that

Dangcagan, Bu8i"non, the place .here he allege"ly .as, is only about four or fie

hours a.ay! $ccor"ingly, the "ecretal portion of the "ecision rea"0

=H#R#6OR#, in the light of the foregoing, the appeale" 'u"g-ent is hereby

$66IR3#D!

SO ORD#R#D!:+

Hence, the present reie.! In the Court Resolution)* "ate" 'uly ?, (**+, the Court

notifie" the parties that, if they so "esire, they -ay file their respectie

supple-ental briefs! In a 3anifestation an" 3otion)7 "ate" Septe-ber @, (**+, the

appellee, through the Office of the Solicitor /eneral, epresse" that it inten"s to

a"opt its Brief before the C$! On $pril 7?, (*7(, the accuse";appellant, through

counsel, file" his Supple-ental Brief, arguing that he .as not in Cagayan "e Oro

City .hen the allege" rape inci"ents too8 place, an" the presence of force, threat or

inti-i"ation is negate" by0 %a& EEEAs oluntary act of going .ith hi- to the con2ugal

be"roo- on October 7?, 7++) %b& EEEAs failure to put up resistance or see8 help

fro- police authorities an" % c& the absence of a -e"ical certificate an" of bloo"

traces in EEEAs panties!)(

Our Ruling

I. R&p &'( ?&rri&<@ ; i;ori&l o'';io'

The eolution of rape la.s is actually trace" to t.o ancient #nglish practices of

Abri"e captureA .hereby a -an con>uere" a .o-an through rape an" Astealing anheiressA .hereby a -an ab"ucte" a .o-an an" -arrie" her!)5

The rape la.s then .ere inten"e" not to re"ress the iolation of the .o-anAs

chastity but rather to punish the act of obtaining the heiressA property by forcible

-arriage)@ or to protect a -anAs aluable interest in his .ifeAs chastity or her

"aughterAs irginity!)<

If a -an rape" an un-arrie" irgin, he .as guilty of stealing her fatherAs property

an" if a -an rape" his .ife, he .as -erely using his property!)?

Fn"er the chattel theory prealent "uring the ?th century, a .o-an .as the

property of her father until she -arries to beco-e the property of her husban"!): If

a -an ab"ucte" an un-arrie" .o-an, he ha" to pay the o.ner, an" later buy her

fro- the o.ner buying an" -arrying a .ife .ere synony-ous!))

6ro- the 77th century to the 7?th century, a .o-an lost her i"entity upon -arriage

an" the la. "enie" her political po.er an" status un"er the feu"al "octrine of

coerture!)+

$ husban" ha" the right to chastise his .ife an" beat her if she -isbehae",

allo.ing hi- to bring or"er .ithin the fa-ily!+*

This .as supplante" by the -arital unity theory, .hich espouse" a si-ilar concept!

Fpon -arrying, the .o-an beco-es one .ith her husban"! She ha" no right to

-a8e a contract, sue another, o.n personal property or .rite a .ill!+7

II. T ?&ri;&l ?p;io' rl

In the 7:th century, Sir 3atthe. Hale %Hale&, a Chief 'ustice in #nglan", conceie"the irreocable i-plie" consent theory that .oul" later on e-erge as the -arital

ee-ption rule in rape! He state" that0

KTLhe husban" cannot be guilty of a rape co--itte" by hi-self upon his la.ful . ife,

for by their -utual -atri-onial consent an" contract the .ife hath gien up herself

in this 8in" unto her husban", .hich she cannot retract!+(

The rule .as obsere" in co--on la. countries such as the Fnite" States of

$-erica %FS$& an" #nglan"! It gies legal i--unity to a -an .ho forcibly seually

assaults his .ife, an act .hich .oul" be rape if co--itte" against a .o-an not his

.ife!+5 In those 2uris"ictions, rape is tra"itionally "efine" as 9the forcible penetration

of the bo"y of a .o-an .ho is not the .ife of the perpetrator!9+@

The first case in the FS$ that applie" the -arital ee-ption rule .as

Co--on.ealth ! 6ogerty+< pro-ulgate" in 7)<:! The Supre-e 'u"icial Court of

3assachusetts pronounce" that it .oul" al.ays be a "efense in rape to sho.

-arriage to the icti-! Seeral other courts a"here" to a si-ilar rationale .ith all of

the- citing HaleAs theory as basis!+?

The rule .as for-ally co"ifie" in the Penal Co"e of Ne. Gor8 in 7+*+! $ husban"

.as en"o.e" .ith absolute i--unity fro- prosecution for the rape of his

.ife!+: The priilege .as personal an" pertaine" to hi- alone! He ha" the -arital

right to rape his .ife but he .ill be liable .hen he ai"s or abets another person in

raping her!+)

an" the "ignity associate" .ith recognition as a .hole hu-an being

!97*( %Citations o-itte"&

















































In the 7+:*s, the rule .as challenge" by .o-enAs -oe-ents in the FS$

"e-an"ing for its abolition for being iolatie of -arrie" .o-enAs right to be

e>ually protecte" un"er rape la.s!++

In 7+:), the rule .as >ualifie" by the egislature in Ne. Gor8 by proscribing the

application of the rule in cases .here the husban" an" .ife are liing apart

pursuant to a court or"er 9.hich by its ter-s or in its effects re>uires such liing

apart,9 or a "ecree, 2u"g-ent or .ritten agree-ent of separation!7**

In 7+)5, the -arital ee-ption rule .as aban"one" in Ne. Gor8 .hen the Court of

$ppeals of Ne. Gor8 "eclare" the sa-e unconstitutional in People ! iberta7*7 for

lac8 of rational basis in "istinguishing bet.een -arital rape an" non;-arital rape!

The "ecision, .hich also renounce" HaleAs irreocable i-plie" consent theory,

ratiocinate" as follo.s0

=e fin" that there is no rational basis for "istinguishing bet.een -arital rape an"

non-arital rape! The arious rationales .hich hae been asserte" in "efense of the

ee-ption are either base" upon archaic notions about the consent an" property

rights inci"ent to -arriage or are si-ply unable to .ithstan" een the slightest

scrutiny! =e therefore "eclare the -arital ee-ption for rape in the Ne. Gor8

statute to be unconstitutional!

or" HaleAs notion of an irreocable i-plie" consent by a -arrie" .o-an to seual

intercourse has been cite" -ost fre>uently in support of the -arital ee-ption!

$ny argu-ent base" on a suppose" consent, ho.eer, is untenable! Rape is not

si-ply a seual act to .hich one party "oes not consent! Rather, it is a "egra"ing,

iolent act .hich iolates the bo"ily integrity of the icti- an" fre>uently causes

seere, long;lasting physical an" psychic har- ! To eer i-ply consent to such

an act is irrational an" absur"! Other than in the contet of rape statutes, -arriage

has neer been ie.e" as giing a husban" the right to coerce" intercourse on

"e-an" ! Certainly, then, a -arriage license shoul" not be ie.e" as a license

for a husban" to forcibly rape his .ife .ith i-punity! $ -arrie" .o-an has the

sa-e right to control her o.n bo"y as "oes an un-arrie" .o-an ! If a

husban" feels 9aggriee"9 by his .ifeAs refusal to engage in seual intercourse, he

shoul" see8 relief in the courts goerning "o-estic relations, not in 9iolent or

forceful self;help !9

The other tra"itional 2ustifications for the -arital ee-ption .ere the co--on;la.

"octrines that a .o-an .as the property of her husban" an" that the legal

eistence of the .o-an .as 9incorporate" an" consoli"ate" into that of the

husban" !9 Both these "octrines, of course, hae long been re2ecte" in this

State! In"ee", 9Kno.hereL in the co--on;la. .orl" ; KorL in any -o"e- society ;

is a .o-an regar"e" as chattel or "e-eane" by "enial of a separate legal i"entity

By 7++5, -arital rape .as a cri-e in all <* states, .ith 7: of the-, as .ell as the

District of Colu-bia, outla.ing the act .ithout ee-ptions! 3ean.hile, the 55 other

states grante" so-e ee-ptions to a husban" fro- prosecution such as .hen the

.ife is -entally or physically i-paire", unconscious, asleep, or legally unable to

consent!7*5

III. M&ri;&l R&p i' ; Pilippi'

Interestingly, no "ocu-ente" case on -arital rape has eer reache" this Court until

no.! It appears, ho.eer, that the ol" proisions of rape un"er $rticle 55< of the

RPC a"here" to HaleAs irreocable i-plie" consent theory, albeit in a li-ite" for-!

$ccor"ing to Chief 'ustice Ra-on C! $>uino,7*@ a husban" -ay not be guilty of rape

un"er $rticle 55< of $ct No! 5)7< but, in case there is legal separation, the husban"

shoul" be hel" guilty of rape if he forces his .ife to sub-it to seual intercourse!7*<

In 7+)7, the Philippines 2oine" 7)* countries in ratifying the Fnite" Nations

Conention on the #li-ination of all 6or-s of Discri-ination $gainst =o-en %FN;

C#D$=&!7*? Haile" as the first international .o-enAs bill of rights, the C#D$= is the

first -a2or instru-ent that contains a ban on all for-s of "iscri-ination against

.o-en! The Philippines assu-e" the role of pro-oting gen"er e>uality an"

.o-enAs e-po.er-ent as a ital ele-ent in a""ressing global concerns!7*: The

country also co--itte", a-ong others, to con"e-n "iscri-ination against .o-en

in all its for-s, an" agree" to pursue, by all appropriate -eans an" .ithout "elay, a

policy of eli-inating "iscri-ination against .o-en an", to this en", un"ertoo80

%a& To e-bo"y the principle of the e>uality of -en an" .o-en in their

national constitutions or other appropriate legislation if not yet

incorporate" therein an" to ensure, through la. an" other appropriate

-eans, the practical reali4ation of this principle

%b& To a"opt appropriate legislatie an" other -easures, inclu"ingsanctions .here appropriate, prohibiting all "iscri-ination against .o-en

%f& To ta8e all appropriate -easures, inclu"ing legislation, to -o"ify or

abolish eisting la.s, regulations, custo-s an" practices .hich constitute

"iscri-ination against .o-en

%g& To repeal all national penal proisions .hich constitute "iscri-ination

against .o-en!7*)

In co-pliance .ith the foregoing international co--it-ents, the Philippines

enshrine" the principle of gen"er e>uality in the 7+): Constitution specifically in

Sections 77 an" 7@ of $rticle II thereof thus0

b& =hen the offen"e" party is "eprie" of reason or other.ise

unconscious

























Sections 77 an" 7@ of $rticle II thereof, thus0

Sec! 77! The State alues the "ignity of eery hu-an person an" guarantees full

respect for hu-an rights!

Sec! 7@! The State recogni4es the role of .o-en in nation;buil"ing, an" shall ensurethe fun"a-ental e>uality before the la. of .o-en an" -en! The Philippines also

acce"e" to a"opt an" i-ple-ent the generally accepte" principles of international

la. such as the C#D$ = an" its allie" issuances, i40

$rticle II, Section (! The Philippines renounces .ar as an instru-ent of national

policy, an" a"opts the generally accepte" principles of international la. as part of

the la. of the lan" an" a"heres to the policy of peace, e>uality, 2ustice, free"o-,

cooperation, an" a-ity .ith all nations! %#-phasis ours&

The egislature then pursue" the enact-ent of la.s to propagate gen"er e>uality!

In 7++:, R!$! No! )5<5 era"icate" the stereotype concept of rape in $rticle 55< of

the RPC!7*+

The la. reclassifie" rape as a cri-e against person an" re-oe" it fro-the a-bit of cri-es against chastity! 3ore particular to the present case, an"

perhaps the la.As -ost progressie proiso is the (n" paragraph of Section (

thereof recogni4ing the reality of -arital rape an" cri-inali4ing its perpetration, i40

$rticle (??;C! #ffect of Par"on! ; The subse>uent ali" -arriage bet.een the

offen"e" party shall etinguish the cri-inal action or the penalty i-pose"!

In case it is the legal husban" .ho is the offen"er, the subse>uent forgieness by

the .ife as the offen"e" party shall etinguish the cri-inal action or the penalty0

Proi"e", That the cri-e shall not be etinguishe" or the penalty shall not be

abate" if the -arriage is oi" ab initio!

Rea" together .ith Section 7 of the la., .hich un>ualifie"ly uses the ter- 9-an9 in

"efining rape, it is un-ista8able that R!$! No! )5<5 penali4es the cri-e .ithout

regar" to the rapistAs legal relationship .ith his icti-, thus0

$rticle (??;$! Rape0 =hen $n" Ho. Co--itte"! ; Rape is co--itte"0

7& By a -an .ho shall hae carnal 8no.le"ge of a .o-an un"er any of the

follo.ing circu-stances0

a& Through force, threat, or inti-i"ation

c& By -eans of frau"ulent -achination or grae abuse of authority an"

"& =hen the offen"e" party is un"er t.ele %7(& years of age or is

"e-ente", een though none of the circu-stances -entione" aboe be

present!

The eplicit intent to outla. -arital rape is "e"ucible fro- the recor"s of the"eliberations of the 7*th Congress on the la.As progenitorAs, House Bill No! ?(?<

an" Senate Bill No! ?<*! In spite of >ual-s on tagging the cri-e as A-arital rapeA

"ue to conseratie 6ilipino i-pressions on -arriage, the consensus of our

la.-a8ers .as clearly to inclu"e an" penali4e -arital rape un"er the general

"efinition of Arape,A i40

3R! D$3$SIN/0 3a"a- Spea8er, Gour Honor, one -ore point

of clarification in the House ersion on $nti;Rape Bill, House Bill No! ?(?<, .e neer

agree" to -arital rape! But un"er $rticle (??;C, it says here0 9In case it is the legal

husban" .ho is the offen"er!!! 9 Does this presuppose that there is no. -arital

rape !

3R! $R$0 KILn this 2uris"iction, .ell, I only hae a li-ite", ery li-ite" 7:

years of priate practice in the legal profession, 3a"a- Spea8er, an" I beliee that I

can put at sta8e -y license as a la.yer in this 2uris"iction there is no la. that

prohibits a husban" fro- being sue" by the .ife for rape! #en 2urispru"ence, .e

"onAt hae any 2urispru"ence that prohibits a .ife fro- suing a husban"! That is

.hy een if .e "onAt proi"e in this bill epan"ing the "efinition of cri-e that is no.

being presente" for approal, 3a"a- Spea8er, een if .e "onAt proi"e here for

-arital rape, een if .e "onAt proi"e for seual rape, there is the right of the .ife

to go against the husban"! The .ife can sue the husban" for -arital rape an" she

cannot be preente" fro- "oing so because in this 2uris"iction there is no la. that

prohibits her fro- "oing so! This is .hy .e ha" to put secon" paragraph of (??;Cbecause it is the belief of -any of us! , that if it is true that in this 2uris"iction

there is -arital rape een if .e "onAt proi"e it here, then .e -ust proi"e for

so-ething that .ill unify an" 8eep the cohesion of the fa-ily together that is .hy

.e hae the secon" paragraph!

3R! D$3$SIN/0 3a"a- Spea8er, Gour Honor, un"er the House ersion specifically

House Bill No! ?(?< our proision on a husban" forcing the .ife is not -arital rape,

it is -arital seual assault!

3R! $R$0 That is correct, 3a"a- Spea8er!

3R! D$3$SIN/0 But here it is -arital rape because there is no cri-e of seual

assault! So, Gour Honor, "irect to the point, un"er $rticle (??;C, is it our

un"erstan"ing that in the secon" paragraph >uote0 9In case it is the legal husban"

-arrie" na nga 8a-i! I cannot hae se! No, .hat it is saying is youAre KtheL

husban" but you cannot beat -e up! ! ThatAs .hy to -e itAs not alar-ing! It

.as 2ust a .ay of saying youAre KtheL husban" you cannot say .hen I a- charge"





un"erstan"ing that in the secon" paragraph, >uote0 In case it is the legal husban"

.ho is the offen"er, this refers to -arital rape file" against the husban" Is that

correct

3R! $R$0 No, 3a"a- Spea8er, not entirely, no! The ans.er is no!

3R! D$3$SIN/0 So if the husban" is guilty of seual assault, .hat "o you call; it

3R! $R$0 Seual assault, 3a"a- Spea8er!

3R! D$3$SIN/0 There is no cri-e of seual assault, Gour Honor, .e hae alrea"y

state" that! Because un"er 7 an" ( it is all "eno-inate" as rape, there is no cri-e

of seual assault! That is .hy I a- sorry that our House ersion .hich proi"e" for

seual assault .as not carrie" by the Senate ersion because all seual cri-es

un"er this bica-eral conference co--ittee report are all no. "eno-inate" as rape

.hether the penalty is fro- reclusion perpetua to "eath or .hether the penalty is

only prision -ayor! So there is -arital rape, Gour Honor, is that correct

3R! D$3$SIN/0 3a"a- Spea8er, Gour Honor, I a- in faor of this! I a- in faor of

punishing the husban" .ho forces the .ife een to 5* years i-prison-ent! But

please "o not call it -arital rape, call it -arital seual assault because of the

sanctity of -arriage! !77* %#-phasis ours&

HON! $POSTO0 In our ersion, .e "i" not -ention -arital rape but -arital rape is

not eclu"e"!

HON! ROCO0 Geah! No! But I thin8 there is also no specific -ention!

HON! $POSTO0 No! No! No! Silent lang Ayung -arital rape!

HON! ROCO0 KILf .e can retain the effect of par"on, then this -arital rape can

be i-plicitly containe" in the secon" paragraph! So -arital rape actually .as

in the House ersion ! But it .as not another "efinition of rape! Gou .ill notice,

it only says, that because you are the la.ful husban" "oes not -ean that you

cannot co--it rape! Theoretically, I -ean, you can beat up your .ife until sheAs

blue! $n" if the . ife co-plains she .as rape", I guess that, I -ean, you 2ust cannot

raise the "efense K0L I a- the husban"! But .here in the -arriage contract

"oes it say that I can beat you up ThatAs all it -eans! That is .hy if .e stop

referring to it as -arital rape, acceptance is easy! Because parang ang -arital rape,

.as 2ust a .ay of saying you re KtheL husban", you cannot say .hen I a- charge"

.ith rape !

PR#SIDIN/ O66IC#R SH$H$NU0 $ll right, so ho. "o you propose it if .e put it inKL

HON! ROCO0 K$Lll .e are saying KisL that if you are the la.ful husban" "oes

not -ean you can hae carnal 8no.le"ge by forceK,L threat or inti-i"ation or by

"epriing your .ife reason, a grae abuse of authority, I "onAt 8no. ho. that

cannot apply! Di ba yung, or putting an instru-ent into the, yun ang sinasabi 8o

lang, it is not -eant to hae another classification of rape! It is all the sa-e

"efinition !

HON!ROCO0 =hat is (??;6 ! No. if .e can retain (??;6 , .e can say that

this rule is i-plicit alrea"y in the first proiso! It i-plies na there is an instance

.hen a husban" can be charge" K.ithL rape !

HON! RO$S0 Other.ise, silent na!

HON! ROCO0 Other.ise, .e are silent na! So parang i;"elete natin ito! But it is

un"erstoo" that this rule of ei"ence is no. transportKe"L, put into (??;6, the effect

of par"on!

PR#SIDIN/ O66IC#R $POSTO0 =e .ill retain this effect of par"on! =e .ill re-oe

-arital rape!

HON! ROCO0 No, yun ang, oo .e .ill re-oe this one on page 5 but .e .ill retain

the one on page ), the effect of par"on! KILt is inferre" but .e leae it

because after all it is 2ust a rule of ei"ence! But I thin8 .e shoul" un"erstan" that

a husban" cannot beat at his .ife to hae se! Di ha I thin8 that shoul" be -a"e

clear! !

HON! ROCO0 K=Le are not "efining a cri-e of -arital rape! $ll .e are saying is

that if youAre KtheL legal husban", 'esus Christ, "onAt beat up to hae se! I al-ost

.ant, you are -y .ife, .hy "o you hae to beat -e up!

So, ganoon! So, if .e both 2ustify it that .ay in the Report as inferre" in proiso, I

-ean, .e can face up, I hope, to the .o-en an" they .oul" un"erstan" that it is

half achiee"!

HON! Q$3OR$0 I thin8, Raul, as long as .e un"erstan" that .e are not "efining or

creating a ne. cri-e but instea", .e are 2ust "efining a rule of ei"ence! !

B! 9Seual iolence9 refers to an act .hich is seual in nature, co--itte"

against a .o-an or her chil"! It inclu"es, but is not li-ite" to0





HON! ROCO0 Then, in .hich case .e -ay 2ust .ant to clarify as a rule of ei"ence

the fact that he is husban" is not, "oes not negate! 777

CH$IR3$N $R$0 =e all agree on the substance of the point in "iscussion!

The only "isagree-ent no. is .here to place it! et us clear this -atter! There are

t.o suggestions no. on -arital rape! One is that it is rape if it is "one .ith force or

inti-i"ation or any of the circu-stances that .oul" "efine rape i--aterial!

The fact that the husban" an" .ife are separate" "oes not co-e into the picture! So

een if they are liing un"er one roof for as long as the atten"ant

circu-stances of the tra"itional rape is present, then that is rape!77(

PR#SIDIN/ O66IC#R $N/$R$;C$STIO0 3r! Chair-an, KtLhis proision on

-arital rape, it "oes not actually change the -eaning of rape! It -erely erases the

"oubt in anybo"yAs -in", .hether or not rape can in"ee" be co--itte" by the

husban" against the .ife! So the bill really says, you haing been -arrie" to one

another is not a legal i-pe"i-ent! So I "onAt really thin8 there is any nee" to

change the concept of rape as "efine" presently un"er the reise" penal co"e! This

"oKesL not actually a"" anything to the "efinition of rape! It -erely says, it is

-erely clarificatory! That if in"ee" the .ife has ei"ence to sho. that she .as really

bro. beaten, or .hateer or force" or inti-i"ate" into haing seual intercourse

against her .ill, then the cri-e of rape has been co--itte" against her by the

husban", not.ithstan"ing the fact that they hae been legally -arrie"! It "oes not

change anything at all, 3r! Chair-an!

PR#SIDIN/ O66IC#R $POSTO0 Ges, I thin8, there is no change on this !775

The para"ig- shift on -arital rape in the Philippine 2uris"iction is further affir-e"

by R!$! No! +(?(,77@ .hich regar"s rape .ithin -arriage as a for- of seual

iolence that -ay be co--itte" by a -an against his .ife .ithin or outsi"e the

fa-ily abo"e, i40

Violence against .o-en an" their chil"ren refers to any act or a series of acts

co--itte" by any person against a .o-an .ho is his .ife, for-er .ife, or against a

.o-an .ith .ho- the person has or ha" a seual or "ating relationship, or .ith

.ho- he has a co--on chil", or against her chil" .hether legiti-ate or

illegiti-ate, .ithin or .ithout the fa-ily abo"e, .hich result in or is li8ely to result

in! physical, seual, psychological har- or suffering, or econo-ic abuse inclu"ing

threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harass-ent or arbitrary "epriation

of liberty! It inclu"es, but is not li-ite" to, the follo.ing acts0

$! 9Physical Violence9 refers to acts that inclu"e bo"ily or physical har-

a& rape, seual harass-ent, acts of lasciiousness, treating a

.o-an or her chil" as a se ob2ect, -a8ing "e-eaning an"

seually suggestie re-ar8s, physically attac8ing the seual parts

of the icti-As bo"y, forcing her1hi- to .atch obscene publications

an" in"ecent sho.s or forcing the .o-an or her chil" to "o

in"ecent acts an"1or -a8e fil-s thereof, forcing the .ife an"

-istress1loer to lie in the con2ugal ho-e or sleep together in

the sa-e roo- .ith the abuser

b& acts causing or atte-pting to cause the icti- to engage in any

seual actiity by force, threat of force, physical or other har- or

threat of physical or other har- or coercion

c& Prostituting the .o-an or chil"!

Statistical figures confir- the aboe characteri4ation! #-otional an" other for-s of

non;personal iolence are the -ost co--on type of spousal iolence accounting for

(5M inci"ence a-ong eer;-arrie" .o-en! One in seen eer;-arrie" .o-en

eperience" physical iolence by their husban"s .hile eight percent %)M&

eperience" seual iolence!77<

I. R=;&;io' o= ; &(8&ppll&';B &r<?';

The cru of the accuse";appellantAs plea for ac>uittal -irrors the irreocable i-plie"

consent theory! In his appeal brief before the C$, he posits that the t.o inci"ents of

seual intercourse, .hich gae rise to the cri-inal charges for rape, .ere

theoretically consensual, obligatory een, because he an" the icti-, EEE, .ere a

legally -arrie" an" cohabiting couple! He argues that consent to copulation is

presu-e" bet.een cohabiting husban" an" .ife unless the contrary is proe"!

The accuse";appellant further clai-s that this case shoul" be ie.e" an" treate""ifferently fro- or"inary rape cases an" that the stan"ar"s for "eter-ining the

presence of consent or lac8 thereof -ust be a"2uste" on the groun" that seual

co--unity is a -utual right an" obligation bet.een husban" an" .ife!77?

The contentions faile" to -uster legal an" rational -erit!

The ancient custo-s an" i"eologies fro- .hich the irreocable i-plie" consent

theory eole" hae alrea"y been superse"e" by -o"e- global principles on the

e>uality of rights bet.een -en an" .o-en an" respect for hu-an "ignity

establishe" in arious international conentions, such as the C#D$=! The

Philippines, as State Party to the C#D$=, recogni4e" that a change in the tra"itional

role of -en as .ell as the role of .o-en in society an" in the fa-ily is nee"e" to

achiee full e>uality bet.een the-! $ccor"ingly, the country o.e" to ta8e all

appropriate -easures to -o"ify the social an" cultural patterns of con"uct of -en

an" .o-en, .ith a ie. to achieing the eli-ination of pre2u"ices, custo-s an" all

cannot renege on its international co--it-ents an" acco--o"ate conseratie yet

irrational notions on -arital actiities7(7 that hae lost their releance in a

progressiesociety!


















an" .o-en, .ith a ie. to achieing the eli-ination of pre2u"ices, custo-s an" all

other practices .hich are base" on the i"ea of the inferiority or the superiority of

either of the sees or on stereotype" roles for -en an" .o-en!77: One of such

-easures is R!$! No )5<5 insofar as it era"icate" the archaic notion that -arital

rape cannot eist because a husban" has absolute proprietary rights oer his .ifeAs

bo"y an" thus her consent to eery act of seual inti-acy .ith hi- is al.ays

obligatory or at least, presu-e"!

$nother i-portant international instru-ent on gen"er e>uality is the FN Dec larationon the #li-ination of Violence $gainst =o-en, .hich .as Pro-ulgate"77) by the FN

/eneral $sse-bly subse>uent to the C#D$ =! The Declaration, in enu-erating the

for-s of gen"er;base" iolence that constitute acts of "iscri-ination against

.o-en, i"entifie" A-arital rapeA as a species of seual iolence, i40

$rticle 7

6or the purposes of this Declaration, the ter- 9iolence against .o-en9 -eans any

act of gen"er;base" iolence that results in, or is li8ely to result in, physical, seual

or psychological har- or suffering to .o-en, inclu"ing threats of such acts,

coercion or arbitrary "epriation of liberty, .hether occurring in public or in priate

life!

$rticle (

Violence against .o-en shall be un"erstoo" to enco-pass, but not be li-ite" to,

the follo.ing0

%a& Physical, seual an" psychological iolence occurring in the fa-ily, inclu"ing

battering, seual abuse of fe-ale chil"ren in the househol", "o.ry;relate" iolence,

-arital rape, fe-ale genital -utilation an" other tra"itional practices har-ful to

.o-en, non;spousal iolence an" iolence relate" to eploitation77+ %#-phasis

ours&

Clearly, it is no. ac8no.le"ge" that rape, as a for- of seual iolence, eists .ithin

-arriage! $ -an .ho penetrates her .ife .ithout her consent or against her .ill

co--its seual iolence upon her, an" the Philippines, as a State Party to the C#D$

= an" its acco-panying Declaration, "efines an" penali4es the act as rape un"er

R!$! No! )5<5!

$ .o-an is no longer the chattel;anti>uate" practices labele" her to be! $ husban"

.ho has seual intercourse .ith his .ife is not -erely using a property, he is

fulfilling a -arital consortiu- .ith a fello. hu-an being .ith "ignity e>ual7(* to that

he accor"s hi-self! He cannot be per-itte" to iolate this "ignity by coercing her to

engage in a seual act .ithout her full an" free consent! Surely, the Philippines

progressie society!

It is true that the 6a-ily Co"e,7(( obligates the spouses to loe one another but this

rule sanctions affection an" seual inti-acy, as epressions of loe, that are both

spontaneous an" -utual7(5 an" not the 8in" .hich is unilaterally eacte" by force or

coercion!

6urther, the "elicate an" reerent nature of seual inti-acy bet.een a husban" an"

.ife eclu"es cruelty an" coercion! Seual inti-acy brings spouses .holeness an"

oneness! It is a gift an" a participation in the -ystery of creation! It is a "eep sense

of spiritual co--union! It is a function .hich enliens the hope of procreation an"

ensures the continuation of fa-ily relations! It is an epressie interest in each

otherAs feelings at a ti-e it is nee"e" by the other an" it can go a long .ay in

"eepening -arital relationship!7(@ =hen it is egoistically utili4e" to "espoil -arital

union in or"er to a"ance a felonious urge for coitus by force, iolence or

inti-i"ation, the Court .ill step in to protect its lofty purpose, in"icate 2ustice an"

protect our la.s an" State policies! Besi"es, a husban" .ho feels aggriee" by his

in"ifferent or unintereste" .ifeAs absolute refusal to engage in seual inti-acy -ay

legally see8 the courtAs interention to "eclare her psychologically incapacitate" to

fulfill an essential -arital obligation!7(< But he cannot an" shoul" not "e-an" seual

inti-acy fro- her coerciely or iolently!

3oreoer, to treat -arital rape cases "ifferently fro- non;-arital rape cases in

ter-s of the ele-ents that constitute the cri-e an" in the rules for their proof,

infringes on the e>ual protection clause! The Constitutional right to e>ual protection

of the la.s7(? or"ains that si-ilar sub2ects shoul" not be treate" "ifferently, so as to

gie un"ue faor to so-e an" un2ustly "iscri-inate against others no person or

class of persons shall be "enie" the sa-e protection of la.s, .hich is en2oye", by

other persons or other classes in li8e circu-stances!7(:

$s aboe "iscusse", the "efinition of rape in Section 7 of R!$! No! )5<5 pertains to0

%a& rape, as tra"itionally 8no.n %b& seual assault an" %c& -arital rape or that

.here the icti- is the perpetratorAs o.n spouse! The single "efinition for all threefor-s of the cri-e sho.s that the la. "oes not "istinguish bet.een rape co--itte"

in .e"loc8 an" those co--itte" .ithout a -arriage! Hence, the la. affor"s

protection to .o-en rape" by their husban" an" those rape" by any other -an

ali8e!

The posture a"ance" by the accuse";appellant arbitrarily "iscri-inates against

-arrie" rape icti-s oer un-arrie" rape icti-s because it .ithhol"s fro- -arrie"

.o-en rape" by their husban"s the penal re"ress e>ually grante" by la. to all rape

icti-s!

6urther, the Court a"heres to an" hereby a"opts the rationale in iberta in re2ecting

the argu-ent a8in to those raise" by herein accuse";appellant! $ -arriage license

shoul" not be ie.e" as a license for a husban" to forcibly rape his .ife . ith

It is settle" that the ealuation by the trial court of the cre"ibility of .itnesses an"

their testi-onies are entitle" to the highest respect! This is in ie. of its ini-itable

opportunity to "irectly obsere the .itnesses an" their "eport-ent, con"uct an"






























y p

i-punity! $ -arrie" .o-an has the sa-e right to control her o.n bo"y, as "oes an

un-arrie" .o-an!7() She can gie or .ithhol" her consent to a seual intercourse

.ith her husban" an" he cannot unla.fully .restle such consent fro- her in case

she refuses!

astly, the hu-an rights of .o-en inclu"e their right to hae control oer an"

"eci"e freely an" responsibly on -atters relate" to their seuality, inclu"ing seual

an" repro"uctie health, free of coercion, "iscri-ination an" iolence!7(+ =o-en "onot "iest the-seles of such right by contracting -arriage for the si-ple reason

that hu-an rights are inalienable!75*

In fine, since the la. "oes not separately categori4e -arital rape an" non;-arital

rape nor proi"e for "ifferent "efinition or ele-ents for e ither, the Court, tas8e" to

interpret an" apply .hat the la. "ictates, cannot tru"ge the forbi""en sphere of

2u"icial legislation an" unla.fully "iert fro- .hat the la. sets forth! Neither can

the Court fra-e "istinct or stricter ei"entiary rules for -arital rape cases as it

.oul" ine>uitably bur"en its icti-s an" unreasonably an" irrationally classify the-

"ifferently fro- the icti-s of non;-arital rape!

In"ee", there eists no legal or rational reason for the Court to apply the la. an"the ei"entiary rules on rape any "ifferently if the aggressor is the .o-anAs o.n

legal husban"! The ele-ents an" >uantu- of proof that support a -oral certainty of

guilt in rape cases shoul" apply unifor-ly regar"less of the legal relationship

bet.een the accuse" an" his accuser!

Thus, the Court -eticulously reie.e" the present case in accor"ance .ith the

establishe" legal principles an" ei"entiary policies in the prosecution an" resolution

of rape cases an" foun" that no reersible error can be i-pute" to the coniction

-ete" the accuse";appellant!

The ei"ence for the prosecution .as

base" on cre"ible .itnesses .ho gae

e>ually cre"ible testi-onies

In rape cases, the coniction of the accuse" rests heaily on the cre"ibility of the

icti-! Hence, the strict -an"ate that all courts -ust ea-ine thoroughly the

testi-ony of the offen"e" party! =hile the accuse" in a rape case -ay be conicte"

solely on the testi-ony of the co-plaining .itness, courts are, nonetheless, "uty;

boun" to establish that their reliance on the icti-As testi-ony is 2ustifie"! Courts

-ust ensure that the testi-ony is cre"ible, conincing, an" other.ise consistent

.ith hu-an nature! If the testi-ony of the co-plainant -eets the test of cre"ibility,

the accuse" -ay be conicte" on the basis thereof!757

pp y y p ,

attitu"e, especially "uring cross;ea-ination! Thus, unless it is sho.n that its

ealuation .as tainte" .ith arbitrariness or certain facts of substance an" alue

hae been plainly oerloo8e", -isun"erstoo", or -isapplie", the sa-e .ill not be

"isturbe" on appeal!75(

$fter approi-ating the perspectie of the trial court thru a -eticulous scrutiny of

the entire recor"s of the trial procee"ings an" the transcript of each .itnessesA

testi-ony, the Court foun" no 2ustification to "isturb its fin"ings!

Rather, the Court obsere" that EEE an" her testi-ony .ere both cre"ible an"

spontaneous! Haile" to the .itness stan" on si separate occasions, EEE neer

.aere" neither "i" her state-ents acillate bet.een uncertainty an" certitu"e! She

re-aine" consistent, categorical, straightfor.ar", an" can"i" "uring the rigorous

cross;ea-ination an" on rebuttal ea-ination, she .as able to conincingly

eplain an" "ebun8 the allegations of the "efense!

She ii"ly recounte" ho. the accuse";appellant force" her to hae se . ith hi-

"espite her refusal on October 7?, 7++)! He initially or"ere" her to sleep besi"e hi-

in their con2ugal be" by iolently thro.ing the cot .here she .as resting! In or"er

not to aggraate his te-per, EEE obeye"! On the be", he insinuate" for the- tohae se! =hen she re2ecte" his a"ances "ue to ab"o-inal pain an" hea"ache, his

re>uest for inti-acy transfor-e" into a stubborn "e-an"! Fnyiel"ing, EEE hel" her

panties but the accuse";appellant forcibly pulle" the- "o.n! The tug cause" the

s-all clothing to tear apart! She reiterate" that she .as not fee ling .ell an" begge"

hi- to stop! But no a-ount of resistance or begging sub"ue" hi-! He flee" her

t.o legs apart, grippe" her han"s, -ounte" her, reste" his o.n legs on hers an"

inserte" his penis into her agina! She continue" plea"ing but he neer "esiste"!755

Her accurate recollection of the secon" rape inci"ent on October 7 :, 7++) is

li8e.ise un-ista8able! $fter the appalling episo"e in the con2ugal be"roo- the

preious night, EEE "eci"e" to sleep in the chil"renAs be"roo-! =hile her "aughters

.ere fiing the be""ings, the accuse";appellant barge" into the roo- an" berate"her for refusing to go .ith hi- to their con2ugal be"roo-! =hen EEE insiste" to

stay in the chil"renAs be"roo-, the accuse";appellant got angry an" pulle" her up!

333As atte-pt to pacify the accuse";appellant further enrage" hi-! He re-in"e"

the- that as the hea" of the fa-ily he coul" "o .hateer he .ants .ith his .ife! To

"e-onstrate his role as patriarch, he or"ere" the chil"ren to go out of the roo- an"

thereafter procee"e" to force EEE into seual intercourse! He forcibly pulle" "o.n

her short pants an" panties as EEE begge" 9Dont "o that to -e, -y bo"y is still

aching an" also -y ab"o-en an" I cannot "o .hat you .ante" -e to "o! I cannot

.ithstan" se!975@ But her pleas fe ll on "eaf ears! The accuse";appellant re-oe"

his shorts an" briefs, sprea" EEEAs legs apart, hel" her han"s, -ounte" her an"

inserte" his penis into her agina! $fter gratifying hi-self, he got "resse", left the

roo- as he chuc8le"0 9Its nice, that is .hat you "esere because you are KaL flirt or

fon" of se!975<

$ He insiste" an" he pulle" -y pantie forcibly, that is .hy -y pantie KsicL .as to-!

J =hy .hat "i" you "o .hen he starte" to pull your pantie KsicL



















#ntrenche" is the rule that in the prosecution of rape cases, the essential ele-ent

that -ust be proe" is the absence of the icti-As consent to the seual congress!75?

Fn"er the la., consent is absent .hen0 %a& it .as .restle" fro- the icti- by force,

threat or inti-i"ation, frau"ulent -achinations or grae abuse of authority or %b&

the icti- is incapable of giing free an" oluntary consent because he1she is

"eprie" of reason or other.ise unconscious or that the offen"e" party is un"er 7(

years of age or is "e-ente"!

Contrary to the accuse";appellantAs asseerations, EEEAs consent .as .restle" fro-

her through force an" inti-i"ation both of .hich .ere establishe" beyon" -oral

certainty by the prosecution through the pertinent testi-ony of EEE, i40

On the October 7?, 7++) rape inci"ent0

%Direct #a-ination&

$TTG! $R/O0

J So, .hile you .ere alrea"y lying on the be" together .ith your husban", "o you

re-e-ber .hat happene"

$ He lie "o.n besi"e -e an" as8e" -e to hae se .ith hi-!

J Ho. "i" he -anifest that he .ante" to hae se .ith you

$ He put his han" on -y lap an" as8e" -e to hae se .ith hi- but I .ar"e" off

his han"!

J Can you "e-onstrate to this Court ho. "i" he use his han"

$ Ges! 9.itness "e-onstrating on ho. the accuse" use" his finger by touching or

8noc8ing her lap .hich -eans that he .ante" to hae se!9

J So, .hat "i" you "o after that

$ I .ar"e" off his han" an" refuse" because I .as not feeling .ell! %at this 2uncture

the .itness is sobbing&

J So, .hat "i" your husban" "o .hen you refuse" hi- to hae se .ith you

J =hy, .hat "i" you "o .hen he starte" to pull your pantie KsicL

$ I resiste" an" trie" to hol" -y pantie KsicL but I faile", because he is so strong!

J So, .hen your pantie KsicL .as to- by your husban", .hat else "i" he "o

$ He flee" -y t.o legs an" reste" his t.o legs on -y legs!

J So after that .hat else "i" he "o

$ He succee"e" in haing se .ith -e because he hel" -y t.o han"s no -atter

ho. I .restle" but I faile" because he is stronger than -e!

COFRT0 3a8e it of recor" that the .itness is sobbing .hile she is giing her

testi-ony!

$TTG! $R/O0 %To the .itness contAng!&

J So, .hat "i" you "o .hen your husban" alrea"y stretche" your t.o legs an" ro"e

on you an" hel" your t.o han"s

$ I tol" hi-, 9"onAt "o that because IA- not feeling .ell an" -y .hole bo"y is

aching!9

J Ho. "i" you say that to your husban"

$ I tol" hi-, 9"onAt "o that to -e because IA- not feeling .ell!9

J Di" you say that in the -anner you are saying no.

$ I shoute" .hen I uttere" that .or"s!

J =as your husban" able to consu--ate his "esire

$ Ges, sir, because I cannot "o anything!75:

%Cross;#a-ination&

On the October 7:, 7++) rape inci"ent0

%Direct #a-ination&







%Cross #a-ination&

$TTG! $3$R/$

J #ery ti-e you hae se .ith your husban" it .as your husban" nor-ally re-oe

your panty

$ Ges, Sir!

J It .as not unusual for your husban" then to re-oe your panty because

accor"ing to you he nor-ally "o that if he hae se .ith you

$ Ges, Sir!

J $n" finally accor"ing to you your husban" hae se .ith you

$ Ges, Sir because he forcibly use" -e in spite of hol"ing -y panty because I "onAt

.ant to hae se .ith hi- at that ti-e!

J Gou "i" not sprea" your legs at that ti-e .hen he re-oe" your panty

$ Ges, Sir!

J 3eaning, your position of your legs .as nor-al "uring that ti-e

$ I trie" to resist by not fleing -y legs!

J $t that ti-e .hen your husban" allege"ly re-oe" your panty he also re-oe

your nightgo.n

$ No, Sir!

J $n" he "i" pull out your "uster KsicL to.ar"s your face

$ He raise" -y "uster KsicL up!

J In other .or"s your face .as coere" .hen he raise" your "uster KsicL

$ No, only on the breast leel!75)

%Direct #a-ination&

$TTG! $R/O

J So, after your chil"ren .ent out of the roo-, .hat transpire"

$ He successfully haing se .ith -e because he pulle" -y short pant an" pantie

forcible!

J So, .hat "i" you say .hen he forcibly pulle" your short an" pantie

$ I tol" hi-, 9"onAt "o that to -e, -y bo"y is still aching an" also -y ab"o-en an"

I cannot "o .hat you .ante" -e to "o! I cannot .ithstan" se!9

J So, .hat happene" to your short .hen he forcibly pulle" it "o.n

$ It .as to-!

J $n" after your short an" pantie .as pulle" "o.n by your husban", .hat "i" he"o

$ He also re-oe" his short an" brief an" flee" -y t.o legs an" -ounte" on -e

an" succee"e" in haing se .ith -e!75+

The accuse";appellant force" his .ife .hen he 8no.ingly oerpo.ere" her by

gripping her han"s, fleing her legs an" then resting his o.n legs thereon in or"er

to facilitate the consu--ation of his -uch;"esire" non;consensual seual

intercourse!

Recor"s also sho. that the accuse";appellant e-ploye" sufficient inti-i"ation upon

EEE! His actuations prior to the actual -o-ent of the felonious coitus reeale" thathe i-pose" his "istorte" sense of -oral authority on his .ife! He furiously

"e-an"e" for her to lay .ith hi- on the be" an" thereafter coerce" her to in"ulge

his seual craing!

The fury the accuse";appellant ehibite" .hen EEE refuse" to sleep .ith hi- on

their be", .hen she insiste" to sleep in the chil"renAs be"roo- an" the fact that he

eercises "o-inance oer her as husban" all co.e" EEE into sub-ission!

The fact that EEE oluntarily .ent .ith the accuse";appellant to their con2ugal

be"roo- on October 7?, 7++) cannot be stretche" to -ean that she consente" to

the force" seual intercourse that ensue"! The accuse";appellant .as EEEAs

husban" an" hence it .as custo-ary for her to sleep in the con2ugal be"roo-! No

consent can be "e"uce" fro- such act of EEE because at that 2uncture there .ere

no in"ications that seual intercourse .as about to ta8e place! The issue of consent

The corroboratie testi-onies of

333 an" OOO are .orthy of cre"ence!








.as still irreleant since the act for .hich the sa-e is legally re>uire" "i" not eist

yet or at least unclear to the person fro- .ho- the consent .as "esire"! The

significant point .hen consent -ust be gien is at that ti-e .hen it is clear to the

icti- that her aggressor is soliciting seual congress! In this case, that point is

.hen the accuse";appellant tappe" his fingers on her lap, a gesture EEE

co-prehen"e" to be an initation for a seual intercourse, .hich she refuse"!

Resistance, -e"ical certificate an" bloo" traces!

=e cannot gie cre"ence to the accuse";appellantAs argu-ent that EEE shoul" hae

hit hi- to coney that she .as resisting his seual onslaught! Resistance is not an

ele-ent of rape an" the la. "oes not i-pose upon the icti- the bur"en to proe

resistance7@* -uch -ore re>uires her to raise a specific 8in" thereof!

$t any rate, EEE put up persistent, au"ible an" intelligible resistance for the

accuse";appellant to recogni4e that she seriously "i" not assent to a seual

congress! She hel" on to her panties to preent hi- fro- un"ressing her, she

refuse" to ben" her legs an" she repeate"ly shoute" an" begge" for hi- to stop!

3oreoer, as an ele-ent of rape, force or inti-i"ation nee" not be irresistible it

-ay be 2ust enough to bring about the "esire" result! =hat is necessary is that the

force or inti-i"ation be sufficient to consu--ate the purpose that the accuse" ha"

in -in"7@7 or is of such a "egree as to i-pel the "efenseless an" hapless icti- to

bo. into sub-ission!7@(

Contrary to the accuse";appellantAs allusions, the absence of bloo" traces in EEEAs

panties or the lac8 of a -e"ical certificate "o not negate rape! It is not the presence

or absence of bloo" on the icti-As un"er.ear that "eter-ines the fact of

rape7@5 inas-uch as a -e"ical certificate is "ispensable ei"ence that is not

necessary to proe rape!7@@These "etails "o not pertain to the ele-ents that pro"uce

the graa-en of the offense that is ;seual intercourse .ith a .o-an against her

.ill or .ithout her consent!7@<

The accuse";appellant harps on the ac>uittal ruling in People ! /o"oy,7@? the

ei"entiary circu-stances of .hich are, ho.eer, "isparate fro- those in the

present case! In /o"oy, the testi-ony of the co-plainant .as inherently .ea8,

inconsistent, an" .as controerte" by the prosecutionAs -e"ico;legal epert .itness

.ho state" that force .as not applie" base" on the position of her hy-enal

laceration! This le" the Court to conclu"e that the absence of any sign of physical

iolence on the icti-As bo"y is an in"ication of consent!7@: Here, ho.eer, EEEAs

testi-ony is, as "iscusse" earlier, cre"ible, spontaneous an" forthright!

The accuse";appellantAs assertion that 333 an" OOOAs testi-onies lac8e" probatie

alue as they "i" not .itness the actual rape is bereft of -erit! It -ust be stresse"

that rape is essentially co--itte" in relatie isolation, thus, it is usually only the

icti- .ho can testify .ith regar" to the fact of the force" seual

intercourse!7@) Hence, the probatie alue of 333 an" OOOAs testi-onies rest not

on .hether they actually .itnesse" the rape but on .hether their "eclarations .ere

in har-ony .ith EEEAs narration of the circu-stances, prece"ing, subse>uent to

an" concurrent .ith, the rape inci"ents!

333 an" OOOAs testi-onies substantiate" significant points in EEEAs narration!

333 hear" EEE shouting an" crying0 9#""ie, "ont "o that to -e, hae pity on

-e97@+ on the night of October 7?, 7++) shortly after EEE an" the accuse";appellant

.ent to their con2ugal be"roo-! =hen 333 .ent upstairs to chec8 on her -other,

the accuse";appellant a"-onishe" her for -e""ling! 6rustrate" to ai" her -other

.ho persistently crie", 333 8ic8e" the "oor so har" the accuse";appellant .as

pro-pte" to open it an" rebu8e 333 once -ore! OOO hear" all these co--otion

fro- the roo- "o.nstairs!

333 then sa. her -other crouche" on the be", crying, .ith her hair "isheele"

.hile her to- panty lay on the floor! $fter a brief struggle .ith the accuse";appellant, 333 an" EEE .ere finally able to escape an" retreat to the chil"renAs

be"roo- .here EEE narrate" to her "aughters0 9KGLour father is an ani-al, a

beast he force" -e to hae se .ith hi- .hen IA- not feeling .ell! 9

EEE gae a si-ilar narration to 333 an" OOO the follo.ing night after the

accuse";appellant barge" insi"e the chil"renAs be"roo-! The couple ha" an

argu-ent an" .hen 333 trie" to interfere, the accuse";appellant or"ere" her an"

OOO to get out after bragging that he can hae se .ith his .ife een in front of the

chil"ren because he is the hea" of the fa-ily! The girls then staye" by the staircase

.here they after.ar"s hear" their -other helplessly crying an" shouting for the

accuse";appellant to stop!

In"ee", the testi-onies of EEE, 333 an" OOO coherently "epicte" that the

accuse";appellant, through the use of force an" inti-i"ation, ha" non;consensual

an" force" carnal 8no.le"ge of his .ife, EEE on the nights of October 7? an" 7:,

7++)!

EEEAs helpless screa-s an" pleas fro- insi"e the be"roo- couple" .ith her erbal

an" physical resistance .ere clear -anifestations of coercion! Her appearance .hen

333 sa. her on the be" after the accuse" appellant opene" the "oor on October

7?, 7++), her con"uct to.ar"s the accuse";appellant on her .ay out of the roo-,

an" her categorical outcry to her chil"ren after the t.o be"roo- episo"es ; all

generate the conclusion that the seual acts that occurre" .ere against her .ill!

6ailure to i--e"iately report to the

police authorities, if satisfactorily

eplaine", is not fatal to the

The ill -otie, .hich the accuse";appellant i-pute" to EEE, "oes not inspire belief

as it is ri""le" .ith loopholes generate" by incongruent an" fli-sy ei"ence! The

prosecution .as able to establish that the P5 3illion "eposit in the spousesA ban8

























cre"ibility of a .itness!

The testi-onies of EEE an" her "aughters cannot be "iscre"ite" -erely because

they faile" to report the rape inci"ents to the police authorities or that EEE

belate"ly file" the rape charges! Delay or acillation by the icti-s in reporting

seual assaults "oes not necessarily i-pair their cre"ibility if such "elay is

satisfactorily eplaine"!7<*

$t that ti-e, EEE an" her "aughters .ere not a.are that a husban" forcing his .ife

to sub-it to seual intercourse is consi"ere" rape! In fact, EEE only foun" out that

she coul" sue his husban" for rape .hen Prosecutor Ben2a-in Tabi>ue, 'r!

%Prosecutor Tabi>ue& tol" her about it .hen she file" the separate charges for grae

threats an" physical in2uries against the accuse";appellant!7<7

It -ust be note" that the inci"ents occurre" a year into the effectiity of R!$! No!

)5<5 abolishing -arital ee-ption in rape cases hence it is un"erstan"able that it

.as not yet 8no.n to a lay-an as oppose" to legal professionals li8e Prosecutor

Tabi>ue! In a""ition, fear of reprisal thru social hu-iliation .hich is the co--on

factor that "eter rape icti-s fro- reporting the cri-e to the authorities is -ore

cu-berso-e in -arital rape cases! This is in ie. of the popular yet out"ate" beliefthat it is the . ifeAs absolute obligation to sub-it to her husban"As carnal "esires! $

husban" raping his o.n .ife is often "is-isse" as a peculiar occurrence or

triiali4e" as si-ple "o-estic trouble!

Fnfa-iliarity .ith or lac8 of 8no.le"ge of the la. cri-inali4ing -arital rape, the

stig-a an" public scrutiny that coul" hae befallen EEE an" her fa-ily ha" the

interention of police authorities or een the neighbors been sought, are acceptable

eplanations for the failure or "elay in reporting the sub2ect rape inci"ents!

The icti- ;S testi-ony on the

.itness stan" ren"ere"

unnecessary the presentation of her

co-plaint;affi"ait as ei"ence!

The failure of the prosecution to present EEEAs co-plaint;affi"ait for rape is not

fatal in ie. of the cre"ible, can"i" an" positie testi-ony of EEE on the .itness

stan"! Testi-onial ei"ence carries -ore .eight than the affi"ait since it

un"er.ent the ru"i-ents of a "irect, cross, re;"irect an" re;cross ea-inations!

$ffi"aits or state-ents ta8en e parte are generally consi"ere" inco-plete an"

inaccurate! Thus, by nature, they are inferior to testi-ony gien in court!7<(

Ill -otie i-pute" to the icti-

account .as the procee"s of their loan fro- the Ban8 of Philippine Islan"s %BPI&!

#hibit ', .hich is a BPI 3 instruction sheet "ate" October 57, 7++? in the a-ount

of P5,7@+,)@*!?5 is the sa-e a-ount the accuse";appellant clai-e" to hae

entruste" to her .ife! $lthough the accuse";appellant "enie" being a.are of such

loan, he a"-itte" that approi-ately P5 3illion .as spent for the construction of

their house! These pieces of ei"ence effectiely belie the accuse" appellantAs

allegation that EEE coul" not account for the -oney "eposite" in the ban8!7<5

$nent, EEEAs allege" etra;-arital affairs, the accuse";appellant faile" to eplain

ho. Bebs coul" be his . ife EEE .hen the letter;sen"er greete" Bebs a 9happy

birth"ay9 on October () .hile EEEAs birth"ay is 'une (5! The accuse";appellant also

"i" not present Bebs herself, being a -ore co-petent .itness to the eistence of

the allege" loe letters for EEE! He li8e.ise faile", "espite pro-ise to "o so, to

present the original copies of such loe letters neither "i" he substantiate EEEAs

suppose" etra;-arital affairs by presenting .itnesses .ho coul" corroborate his

clai-s! 6urther, the Court fin"s it unbelieable that an able -an .oul" not hae the

te-erity to confront his .ife .ho has foole" aroun" .ith 7* -en ; so-e of .ho-

he has een -et! The accuse";appellantAs erratic state-ents on the .itness stan"

are inconsistent .ith the theory of etra;-arital ro-ance -a8ing it reasonable to

infer that he -erely -a"e up those -alicious stories as a "esperate ploy toetricate hi-self out of this legal >uan"ary!

$t best, the basis of the allege" illicit affairs of EEE .ere the accuse";appellantAs

unfoun"e" suspicions that hol" no ei"entiary .eight in la. an" thus inco-petent

to "estroy EEEAs cre"ibility an" that of her testi-ony! In su-, the "efense faile" to

present sufficiently conincing ei"ence that EEE is a -ere in"ictie .ife .ho is

harassing the accuse";appellant .ith fabricate" rape charges!

$libi

It -ust be stresse" that in raising the irreocable i-plie" consent theory as

"efense, the accuse";appellant has essentially a"-itte" the facts of seualintercourse e-bo"ie" in the t.o cri-inal infor-ations for rape! This a"-ission is

inconsistent .ith the "efense of alibi an" any "iscussion thereon .ill thus be

irreleant!

$t any rate, the courts a >uo correctly re2ecte" his alibi!

$libi is one of the .ea8est "efenses not only because it is inherently frail an"

unreliable, but also because it is easy to fabricate an" "ifficult to chec8 or rebut! It

cannot preail oer the positie i"entification of the accuse" by eye.itnesses .ho

ha" no i-proper -otie to testify falsely!7<@

6or the "efense of alibi to prosper, the accuse" -ust proe not only that he .as at

so-e other place at the ti-e of the co--ission of the cri-e, but also that it .as

physically i-possible for hi- to be at the locus "elicti or .ithin its i--e"iate

The Court sustains the -oral "a-ages a.ar"e" in the a-ount of P<*,***!**! 3oral

"a-ages are grante" to rape icti-s .ithout nee" of proof other than the fact of

rape un"er the assu-ption that the icti- suffere" -oral in2uries fro- the
















icinity! Physical i-possibility refers not only to the geographical "istance bet.een

the place .here the accuse" .as an" the place .here the cri-e .as co--itte"

.hen the cri-e transpire", but -ore i-portantly, the facility of access bet.een the

t.o places!7<<

#en granting in arguen"o that the accuse";appellant ha" in"ee" atten"e" a fiesta

in Dangcagan, Bu8i"non or .as hauling co- .ith #>uia on the "ates of co--ission

of the cri-e, the sa-e .ill not easily eonerate hi-! The accuse";appellant faile" toa""uce clear an" conincing ei"ence that it .as physically i-possible for hi- to be

at his resi"ence in Cagayan "e Oro City at the ti-e of the co--ission of the cri-e!

Dangcagan, Bu8i"non can be traerse" by about four or fie hours fro- Cagayan "e

Oro City, an" een less by priate ehicle .hich .as aailable to the accuse"

appellant at any ti-e!7<? Thus, it .as not physically i-possible for hi- to be at the

situs cri-inis at the "ates an" ti-es .hen the t.o rape inci"ents .ere co--itte"!

Bet.een the accuse";appellantAs alibi an" "enial, an" the positie i"entification an"

cre"ible testi-ony of the icti-, an" her t.o "aughters, the Court -ust gie .eight

to the latter, especially in the absence of ill -otie on their part to falsely testify

against the accuse";appellant!

Conclusion

$ll tol", the presu-ption of innocence en"o.e" an accuse";appellant .as

sufficiently oerco-e by EEEAs clear, straightfor.ar", cre"ible, an" truthful

"eclaration that on t.o separate occasions, he succee"e" in haing seual

intercourse .ith her, .ithout her consent an" against her .ill! #i"ence of

oer.hel-ing force an" inti-i"ation to consu--ate rape is etant fro- EEEAs

narration as belieably corroborate" by the testi-onies of 333 an" OOO an" the

physical ei"ence of EEEAs to- panties an" short pants! Base" thereon, the reason

an" conscience of the Court is -orally certain that the accuse";appellant is guilty of

raping his .ife on the nights of October 7? an" 7:, 7++)!

Penalties

The Court affir-s the penalty of reclusion perpetua, for each count of rape, -ete"

upon the accuse";appellant for being in accor" .ith $rticle (??;$ in relation to (??;

B of the RPC! 6urther, he shall not be eligible for parole pursuant to Section 5 of

R!$! No! +5@?, .hich states that 9persons conicte" of offenses punishe" .ith

reclusion perpetua, or .hose sentences .ill be re"uce" to reclusion perpetua, by

reason of this $ct, shall not be eligible for parole un"er $ct No! @7)*, other.ise

8no.n as the In"eter-inate Sentence a., as a-en"e"!97<:

eperience she un"er.ent!7<)

The a.ar" of ciil in"e-nity is proper it is -an"atory upon the fin"ing that rape

too8 place!1âwphi1 Consi"ering that the cri-e co--itte" is si-ple rape, there

being no >ualifying circu-stances atten"ant in its co--ission, the appropriate

a-ount is P<*,***!**7<+ an" not P:<,***!** as a.ar"e" by the RTC!

To sere as an ea-ple for public goo" an" in or"er to "eter a si-ilar for- of

"o-estic iolence, an a.ar" ofP5*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages is i-peratie!7?*

The "a-ages a.ar"e" shall earn legal interest at the rate of si percent %?M& per

annu- to be rec8one" fro- the "ate of finality of this 2u"g-ent until fully pai"!7?7

$ 6inal Note

Rape is a cri-e that eo8es global con"e-nation because it is an abhorrence to a

.o-anAs alue an" "ignity as a hu-an being! It respects no ti-e, place, age,

physical con"ition or social status! It can happen any.here an" it can happen to

anyone! #en, as sho.n in the present case, to a .ife, insi"e her ti-e;honore"fortress, the fa-ily ho-e, co--itte" against her by her husban" .ho o.e" to be

her refuge fro- cruelty! The herein pronounce-ent is an affir-ation to .ies that

our rape la.s proi"e the atone-ent they see8 fro- their seually coercie

husban"s!

Husban"s are once again re-in"e" that -arriage is not a license to forcibly rape

their .ies! $ husban" "oes not o.n his .ifeAs bo"y by reason of -arriage! By

-arrying, she "oes not "iest herself of the hu-an right to an eclusie autono-y

oer her o.n bo"y an" thus, she can la.fully opt to gie or .ithhol" her consent to

-arital coitus! $ husban" aggriee" by his .ifeAs unre-itting refusal to engage in

seual intercourse cannot resort to felonious force or coercion to -a8e her yiel"! He

can see8 succor before the 6a-ily Courts that can "eter-ine .hether her refusal

constitutes psychological incapacity 2ustifying an annul-ent of the -arriage!

Seual inti-acy is an integral part of -arriage because it is the spiritual an"

biological co--union that achiees the -arital purpose of procreation! It entails

-utual loe an" self;giing an" as such it conte-plates only -utual seual

cooperation an" neer seual coercion or i-position!

The Court is a.are that "espite the noble intentions of the herein pronounce-ent,

-enacing personalities -ay use this as a tool to harass innocent husban"s! In this

regar", let it be stresse" that safeguar"s in the cri-inal 2ustice syste- are in place

to spot an" scrutini4e fabricate" or false -arital rape co-plaints an" any person

.ho institutes untrue an" -alicious charges .ill be -a"e ans.erable un"er the

pertinent proisions of the RPC an"1or other la.s!

The cri-e is aggraate" by the -inority the icti- being t.ele years ol" %7(& at

the ti-e of the inci"ent!

















=H#R#6OR#, all the foregoing consi"ere", the Decision "ate" 'uly +, (**) of the

Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR;HC No! **5<5 is hereby $66IR3#D .ith

3ODI6IC$TIONS! $ccuse";appellant #"gar 'u-a.an is foun" /FITG beyon"

reasonable "oubt of t.o %(& counts of R$P# an" is sentence" to suffer the penalty

of reclusion perpetua for each count, .ithout eligibility for parole! He is further

or"ere" to pay the icti-, EEE, the a-ounts of PS*,***!** as ciil

in"e-nity, P<*,***!** as -oral "a-ages, an" P5*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages,

for each count of rape! The a.ar" of "a-ages shall earn legal interest at the rate of si percent %?M& per annu- fro- the finality of this 2u"g-ent until fully pai"!

SO ORD#R#D!


SUPREME COURT

3anila

S#COND DIVISION

G.R. No. 1**+1 !' 2, 2014

PEOPLE O$ T)E PI"LIPPINES, Plaintiff;$ppellee,

s!

WIL$RE"O SOLANO, !R. GECITA, $ccuse";$ppellant!

R # S O F T I O N

"EL CASTILLO, J.:

$ppellant =ilfre"o Solano, 'r! y /ecita .as charge" .ith the cri-e of rape .ith

ho-ici"e in an Infor-ation7 that rea"s as follo.s0

That on or about the ((n" "ay of $pril, (**: at aroun" +0** oAcloc8 in the -orning,

at Sitio O8"o, Barangay Palanas, -unicipality of Pilar, Proince of Sorsogon,

Philippines, an" .ithin the 2uris"iction of this Honorable Court, the aboe;na-e"

accuse", .ith le." "esign, by -eans of force, threat an" inti-i"ation, an" by

e-ploying personal iolence upon 9$$$,9( a 7(;year ol" girl, "i" then an" there,

.ilfully, unla.fully an" feloniously, hae seual intercourse .ith her against her .ill

an" .ithout her ,consent, an" after the seual assault sai" accuse" strangle"

9$$$,9 resulting KinL the i--e"iate "eath of sai" icti-, to the "a-age an"

pre2u"ice of her legal heirs!

CONTR$RG TO $=!5

=hen arraigne" on 'une ?, (**:, appellant entere" a plea of not guilty!@

Trial on the -erits ensue"!

The facts of the case as su--ari4e" by the Court of $ppeals are as follo.s0

To proe the charges against accuse";appellant, #".in Canon, 'r! K#".in, 'r!L

testifie" that in the -orning of (( $pril (**:, he an" his brother .ere on their .ay

ho-e .hen he sa. KappellantL chasing $$$ on a grassy area locate" at the

outs8irts of their barangay! Not -in"ing the t.o, they left an" procee"e" ho-e!

That sa-e -orning, he learne" that people .ere loo8ing for $$$ so he tol" his

father of .hat he sa.! His father in turn infor-e" the barangay officials an", after

con"ucting a search, $$$s lifeless bo"y .as foun" in a s.a-p near the place .here

#".in, 'r! sa. KappellantL chasing the icti-! On cross;ea-ination, #".in, 'r!

-aintaine" that he .as able to see an" recogni4e KappellantL an" $$$ fro- a

"istance of about <* to ?* -eters before they ran to.ar"s the 8nee;high cogon

grass area! $ccor"ing to hi-, KappellantL stoppe" an" loo8e" at the- beforerunning after the icti-!

3ean.hile, prosecution .itness Nestor $r-enta KNestorL fortifie" his Sinu-paang

De8laracion an" clai-e" that in a grassy place in Barangay Palanas, he sa.

KappellantL hol"ing an unconscious $$$ by her ar-pits an" K"raggingL her .hile

she .as facing up lying on the groun"! Fpon seeing hi-, KappellantL gae hi- a

"agger loo8, so, he hurrie"ly left the place an" procee"e" to the barangay proper

.here he reporte" the -atter to the barangay tano"!

On cross;ea-ination, Nestor testifie" that he .as about + -eters a.ay fro-

.here he sa. KappellantL "rag $$$! =hen he arrie" at the to.n proper, he learne"

that there .as a search for $$$ so he relaye" .hat he sa. to Chief Tano" Qal"yCa-po KChief Tano" Ca-poL an" .ent ho-e! Thereafter, he .as infor-e" that the

bo"y of $$$ .as foun" in the place .here he sa. KappellantL "ragging the icti-!

On further >uestioning, he asserte" that he 8ne. $$$ because he .as the careta8er

of the fishpon" o.ne" by the icti-s -other! He also 8ne. KappellantL because he

.as a frien" of his father!

On the other han", Chief Tano" Ca-po clai-e" that after #".in Canon, Sr! K#".in,

Sr!L reporte" the -atter to the-K, aL group of about 5* persons, so-e of .ho-

.ere relaties of $$$, procee"e" to the s.a-py area .here #".in, 'r! sa.

KappellantL an" $$$! $t aroun" : ocloc8 in the eening, .ith the ai" of a petro-a,

they sa. the bo"y of $$$ burie" in -u"! =hen as8e" to eplain the pictures ta8en

fro- the cri-e scene, the . itness "escribe" that $$$ .as na8e" .hen they foun"

her an" her "ress .as tie" on the nec8 an" the panty .as in one leg alrea"y! Being

th l t th " " t th h f K ll t L l t h "

The accuse" .as seen chasing the icti- at the approi-ate ti-e of the

perpetration of the cri-e an" at the hilly an" grassy place .here the icti- .as

foun"













the only suspect, they procee"e" to the house of KappellantsL uncle to apprehen"

hi-! $ccor"ing to hi-, KappellantL confesse" to raping an" 8illing $$$ .hen

inestigate" at the barrio hall! He .as re-orseful an" repentant .hen inestigate"

an" "i" not react .hen they tol" hi- that they foun" the bo"y of $$$ in the

s.a-p!

On cross;ea-ination, Chief Tano" Ca-po testifie" that after his arrest,

KappellantL erbali4e" to the- his innocence an" that he .as the one .hoconince" KappellantL to surren"er!

$ccor"ing to K3unicipal Health Officer Dr! Dai" Da4aL, his ea-ination of $$$s

genitalia sho.e" that there .as bloo" oo4ing out fro- her agina .hich .as

-ar8e" .ith hy-enal lacerations an" presence of suspecte" sper-ato4oa thereby

in"icating that she .as sub2ecte" to seual intercourse!

K$ppellantL "enie" that he rape" an" 8ille" $$$! He -aintaine" that on the "ay of

the inci"ent, he an" his t.o cousins .ere at the house of his uncle, #rnesto Solano

to .atch oer the palay! $roun" 7 ocloc8 in the afternoon, he .as su--one" by

Chief Tano" Ca-po an" brought to the barangay hall!

Thereat, Ka relatie of 9$$$9L as8e" hi- .hether he sa. $$$ an" .hen he

ans.ere" in the negatie, K9$$$s9 relatieL thre. a punch at hi-! $fter that, he

.as instructe" by his uncle to go ho-e but at aroun" 7* ocloc8 in the eening,

so-e -ilitary -en arreste" hi- an" brought hi- to the 3unicipal Hall of Pilar,

Sorsogon!

On cross;ea-ination, he a"-itte" that he personally 8no.s the fa-ily of the

icti- since he .or8e" for the- for less than a year! =hen he learne" about the

allege" rape of his sister by Ka relatie of 9$$$9L so-eti-e in the year (***, he >uit

his 2ob .ith the-! He also a"-itte" hol"ing a gru"ge against the Kfa-ily of

9$$$9L but "enie" that he 8no.s anything about $$$s "eath! He also "i" not 8no.

of any reason .hy prosecution .itnesses #".in, 'r!, #".in Sr!, Nelson an" Chief

Tano" Ca-po .oul" testify against hi- inas-uch as he .as in goo" ter-s .ith

the-! astly, KappellantL a"-itte" that the place .here he .as then staying can

easily be negotiate" by .al8ing or any -eans of transportation an" that he coul"

leae the place an" return to it easily!<

On 3ay 7), (**+, the Regional Trial Court of Sorsogon City, Branch <7 ren"ere" its

Decision?

fin"ing appellant guilty as charge" base" on the follo.ing circu-stantial ei"ence0

The uncontroerte" fact that the accuse" .as seen "ragging the -otionless icti-

lying .ith her face up by another prosecution .itness near the sa-e place .here he

.as also seen chasing the icti-

There .as no other person last seen together .ith the icti-

The uncontroerte" testi-ony of so-e prosecution .itnesses regar"ing the

etra2u"icial confession -a"e by the accuse" that he a"-itte" raping an" 8illing the

icti- an" on the basis thereof he .as apprehen"e" an" "etaine" in the eening of

the "ay of the inci"ent in >uestion

The fin"ing of the ea-ining physician .ho con"ucte" the autopsy that the icti-

.as sub2ecte" to seual intercourse .hen she .as still alie -anifeste" by seeral

lacerations an" bloo" foun" on her genitalia

Death of the icti- by strangulation an" the fact that the bo"y of the icti- .as

foun" sub-erge" in the -u""y area ery near the place .here the accuse" .as

seen chasing the icti- an" li8e.ise ery near the place .here the accuse" .asli8e.ise seen "ragging the icti-!

The accuse" a"-itte" being angry at the Kfa-ily of 9$$$9L after he learne" that his

sister .ho by then .as alrea"y in 3anila .as rape" by Ka relatie of 9$$$L!:

The trial court "i" not len" cre"ence to the alibi of appellant! It obsere" that not

one of appellants cousins .ho .ere suppose" to be .ith hi- .hen the inci"ent

happene" steppe" for.ar" to corroborate appellants testi-ony! Besi"es, the trial

court note" that the place .here appellant .as suppose"ly present .as locate" in

the sa-e barangay .here the rape an" ho-ici"e .as co--itte"! $s such, it .as

not physically i-possible for appellant to be present at the place .here the cri-e

.as co--itte"! The trial court also foun" that appellant harbore" ill;feelings to.ar"the fa-ily of 9$$$9 after learning that a relatie of 9$$$9 rape" his sister! astly, the

court a >uo consi"ere" the -inority of 9$$$9 as the prosecution satisfactorily

establishe" that 9$$$9 .as only 7( years of age "uring the co--ission of the

cri-e!

The "ispositie portion of the trial courts Decision rea"s0

=H#R#6OR#, pre-ises consi"ere", the Court hereby fin"s accuse" =I6R#DO

SO$NO 'R! y /#CIT$, /FITG beyon" reasonable "oubt of the special co-ple

cri-e of Rape .ith Ho-ici"e an" hereby sentences hi- to suffer the penalty of

reclusion perpetua .ithout the possibility of parole!









$s regar"s the penalty, both the trial court an" the appellate court correctly

sentence" appellant to reclusion perpetua .ithout eligibility for parole! Both courts

also properly a.ar"e" the heirs of 9$$$9 the a-ounts ofP7**,***!** as ciil

in"e-nity P:< *** ** as -oral "a-ages P(< *** ** as te-perate "a-ages

penalty of reclusion perpetua .ithout eligibility for parole, to pay the heirs of 9$$$9

Pl**,***!** as ciil in"e-nity, P:<,***!** as -oral "a-ages, P(<,***!** as

te-perate "a-ages, an" P<*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages, is $66IR3#D .ith

3ODI6IC$TION that interest at the rate of ?M per annu- shall be i-pose" on all



in"e-nity, P:<,***!** as -oral "a-ages, P(<,***!** as te-perate "a-ages,

an"P<*,***!** as ee-plary "a-ages!7) Ho.eer, all "a-ages a.ar"e" shall earn

interest at the rate of ?M per annu- fro- the "ate of finality of this 2u"g-ent Auntil

fully pai" in line .ith preailing 2urispru"ence!

=H#R#6OR#, the 'uly 7@, (*77 Decision of the Court of $ppeals in C$;/!R! CR;H!C!

No! *@*7* affir-ing the 3ay 7), (**+ Decision of the Regional Trial Court of

Sorsogon City, Branch <7 fin"ing appellant =ilfre"o Solano, 'r! y /ecita guiltybeyon" reasonable "oubt of rape .ith ho-ici"e an" sentencing hi- to suffer the

3ODI6IC$TION that interest at the rate of ?M per annu- shall be i-pose" on all

"a-ages a.ar"e" fro- "ate of finality of this 2u"g-ent until fully pai"!

SO ORD#R#D!



Documents

Compilation of 2014 Jurisprudence in Criminal Procedure