Crim Pro 5th Batch

8/18/2019 Crim Pro 5th Batch

1/49

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManila

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 186001 October 2, 2009

ANTONIO CABADOR, Petitioner,vs.PEOPE O! T"E P"IIPPINE#, Res$on%ent.

D E C I S I O N

ABAD !."

Befo#e the Cou#t is a petition fo# #e$ie% on ce#tio#a#i assailin& the Cou#t of Appeals' (CA) Decision of Au&ust * +,,- an/ Resolution of Octobe# +-+,,-+ in CA01.R. SP ,,*2 that affi#3e/ the Au&ust 2 +,,4 O#/e#2 of the Re&ional T#ial Cou#t (RTC) of 5ue6on Cit7.

The facts a#e not /ispute/.

On !une +2 +,,, the public p#osecuto# accuse/ petitione# Antonio Caba/o# befo#e the RTC of 5ue6on Cit7 in C#i3inal Case 50,,082+8 of 3u#/e#in& inconspi#ac7 %ith othe#s Att7. !un N. Vale#io.* On 9eb#ua#7 2 +,,4 afte# p#esentin& onl7 fi$e %itnesses o$e# fi$e 7ea#s of inte#3ittent t#ial the RTC/ecla#e/ at an en/ the p#osecution's p#esentation of e$i/ence an/ #e:ui#e/the p#osecution to 3a;e a %#itten o# fo#3al offe# of its /ocu3enta#7 e$i/ence%ithin < /a7s f#o3 notice.< But the public p#osecuto# as;e/ fo# th#eee=tensions of ti3e the last of %hich %as to en/ on !ul7 +- +,,4. Still thep#osecution /i/ not 3a;e the #e:ui#e/ %#itten offe#.

On Au&ust +,,4 petitione# Caba/o# file/ a 3otion to /is3iss the case4co3plainin& of a tu#tle0pace/ p#ocee/in& in the case since his a##est an//etention in +,, an/ in$o;in& his #i&ht to a spee/7 t#ial. 9u#the# he clai3e/that in the ci#cu3stances the t#ial cou#t coul/ not consi/e# an7 e$i/encea&ainst hi3 that ha/ not been fo#3all7 offe#e/. >e also pointe/ out that thep#osecution %itnesses /i/ not ha$e ;no%le/&e of his alle&e/ pa#t in thec#i3e cha#&e/.

Un;no%n to petitione# Caba/o# ho%e$e# fou# /a7s ea#lie# o# on !ul7 +-+,,4 the p#osecution as;e/ the RTC fo# anothe# e=tension of the pe#io/ fo# its fo#3al offe# %hich offe# it e$entuall7 3a/e on Au&ust +,,4 the /a7Caba/o# file/ his 3otion to /is3iss.?

On Au&ust 2 +,,4 the RTC issue/ an O#/e# t#eatin& petitione# Caba/o#'s Au&ust +,,4 3otion to /is3iss as a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence. An/ since hefile/ his 3otion %ithout lea$e of cou#t the RTC /ecla#e/ hi3 to ha$e %ai$e/his #i&ht to p#esent e$i/ence in his /efense. The t#ial cou#t /ee3e/ the casesub3itte/ fo# /ecision insofa# as he %as conce#ne/. Caba/o# file/ a 3otionfo# #econsi/e#ation of this O#/e# but the RTC /enie/ it on 9eb#ua#7 8+,,?.- Caba/o# :uestione/ the RTC's actions befo#e the CA but on Au&ust* +,,- the latte# /enie/ his petition an/ affi#3e/ the lo%e# cou#t's actions.8

@ith the CA's /enial of his 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation on Octobe# +- +,,-petitione# ca3e to this Cou#t $ia a petition fo# #e$ie% on ce#tio#a#i.

The issue in this case is %hethe# o# not petitione# Caba/o#'s 3otion to/is3iss befo#e the t#ial cou#t %as in fact a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence file/ %ithoutlea$e of cou#t %ith the #esult that he effecti$el7 %ai$e/ his #i&ht to p#esente$i/ence in his /efense an/ sub3itte/ the case fo# /ecision insofa# as he%as conce#ne/.

The t#ial p#ope# in a c#i3inal case usuall7 has t%o sta&es" fi#st thep#osecution's p#esentation of e$i/ence a&ainst the accuse/ an/ secon/ theaccuse/'s p#esentation of e$i/ence in his /efense. If afte# the p#osecutionhas p#esente/ its e$i/ence the sa3e appea#s insufficient to suppo#t acon$iction the t#ial cou#t 3a7 at its o%n initiati$e o# on 3otion of the accuse//ispense %ith the secon/ sta&e an/ /is3iss the c#i3inal action., The#e isno point fo# the t#ial cou#t to hea# the e$i/ence of the accuse/ in such a casesince the p#osecution bea#s the bu#/en of p#o$in& his &uilt be7on/#easonable /oubt. The o#/e# of /is3issal a3ounts to an ac:uittal.

But because so3e ha$e in the past use/ the /e3u##e# in o#/e# to /ela7 thep#ocee/in&s in the case the #e3e/7 no% ca##ies a ca$eat. @hen theaccuse/ files a /e3u##e# %ithout lea$e of cou#t he shall be /ee3e/ to ha$e%ai$e/ the #i&ht to p#esent e$i/ence an/ the case shall be consi/e#e/sub3itte/ fo# u/&3ent. On occasions this p#esents a p#oble3 such as%hen li;e the situation in this case the accuse/ files a 3otion to /is3issthat to the RTC ha/ the appea#ance of a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence. Caba/o# insists that it is not one but the CA li;e the lo%e# cou#t #ule/ that it is.

This Cou#t hel/ in Enoas !#. $. Co33ission on Elections+ that to/ete#3ine %hethe# the plea/in& file/ is a /e3u#e# to e$i/ence o# a 3otion to/is3iss the Cou#t 3ust consi/e# () the alle&ations in it 3a/e in &oo/ faith(+) the sta&e of the p#ocee/in& at %hich it is file/ an/ (2) the p#i3a#7obecti$e of the pa#t7 filin& it.

>e#e the pe#tinent po#tions of petitione# Caba/o#'s 3otion to /is3iss #ea/ asfollo%s"

1


2/49

+. On No$e3be# 8 +,, the accuse/ %as a##este/ an/ subse:uentl7b#ou&ht to the 5ue6on Cit7 ail th#ou&h a co33it3ent o#/e# /ate/ No$e3be# + +,, %he#e he ha/ been /etaine/ /u#in& the cou#se of this case.

2. The accuse/ %as a##ai&ne/ on !anua#7 - +,,+ an/ t#ial be&an soon afte#.

*. UP0OA ente#e/ its appea#ance as counsel fo# the accuse/ on !anua#7+, +,,ono#able cou#t #e:ui#e/ the publicp#osecuto# to sub3it its fo#3al offe# of e$i/ence %ithin fifteen (ono#able Cou#t thep#osecution faile/ to file thei# fo#3al offe# of e$i/ence.

,. (Sic) Despite th#ee (2) e=tensions the p#osecution faile/ to file fo#3aloffe# of e$i/ence.

. (Sic) Sec. 2* Rule 2+ of the Rules of Cou#t p#o$i/es that the cou#t shallconsi/e# no e$i/ence %hich has not been fo#3all7 offe#e/. A fo#3al offe# isnecessa#7 since u/&es a#e #e:ui#e/ to base thei# fin/in&s of fact an/ thei#

u/&3ent solel7 an/ st#ictl7 upon the e$i/ence offe#e/ b7 the pa#ties at thet#ial (On& $s. CA 1R No. ?,2). >ence %ithout an7 fo#3al offe# of

e$i/ence this >ono#able Cou#t has no e$i/ence to consi/e#.

+. The cha#&e a&ainst the accuse/ has no le& to stan/ on. The %itnessesthat ha/ been p#esente/ b7 the p#osecution testifie/ 3ainl7 on theoccu##ences on the ni&ht of the inci/ent an/ ha/ no ;no%le/&e of an7connection %ith o# an7 pa#ticipation b7 the accuse/ in the inci/ent.

2. The hea#in&s of the case ha$e been /ela7e/ since +,, th#ou&h no faultof the /efense to the p#eu/ice of the #i&hts of the accuse/ to a spee/7 t#ial

3an/ate/ b7 no less than A#t. III Sec. 4 of the Constitution.

*. Since UP0OA ha/ ente#e/ its appea#ance in +,,


3/49

;no%le/&e of an7 connection %ith o# an7 pa#ticipation b7 the accuse/ in theinci/ent. But these %e#e 3e#e conclusions hi&hli&htin& %hat fi$e 7ea#s of t#ial ha/ acco3plishe/.

The fact is that Caba/o# /i/ not e$en bothe# to /o %hat is so fun/a3ental inan7 /e3u##e#. >e /i/ not state %hat e$i/ence the p#osecution ha/ p#esente/a&ainst hi3 to sho% in %hat #espects such e$i/ence faile/ to 3eet theele3ents of the c#i3e cha#&e/. >is so0calle/ /e3u##e# /i/ not touch on an7

pa#ticula# testi3on7 of e$en one %itness. >e cite/ no /ocu3enta#7 e=hibit.In/ee/ he coul/ not because he /i/ not ;no% that the p#osecution finall73a/e its fo#3al offe# of e=hibits on the sa3e /ate he file/ his 3otion to/is3iss.4 To sa7 that Caba/o# file/ a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence is e:ui$alent tothe p#o$e#bial blin/ 3an touchin& the si/e of an elephant an/ e=clai3in&that he ha/ touche/ a %all.

Besi/es a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence assu3es that the p#osecution has al#ea/7#este/ its case. Section +2 Rule 8 of the Re$ise/ Rules of C#i3inalP#oce/u#e #ea/s"

De3u##e# to e$i/ence. Afte# the p#osecution #ests its case the cou#t 3a7/is3iss the action on the oun/ of insufficienc7 of e$i/ence () on its o%ninitiati$e afte# &i$in& the p#osecution the oppo#tunit7 to be hea#/ o# (+) upon/e3u##e# to the e$i/ence file/ b7 the accuse/ %ith o# %ithout lea$e of cou#t.(E3phasis supplie/)a%phi

>e#e afte# the p#osecution file/ its fo#3al offe# of e=hibits on Au&ust +,,4the sa3e /a7 Caba/o# file/ his 3otion to /is3iss the t#ial cou#t still nee/e/to &i$e hi3 an oppo#tunit7 to obect to the a/3ission of those e=hibits. It alsonee/e/ to #ule on the fo#3al offe#. An/ onl7 afte# such a #ulin& coul/ thep#osecution be /ee3e/ to ha$e #este/ its case. Since Caba/o# file/ his3otion to /is3iss befo#e he coul/ obect to the p#osecution's fo#3al offe#befo#e the t#ial cou#t coul/ act on the offe# an/ befo#e the p#osecution coul/#est its case it coul/ not be sai/ that he ha/ inten/e/ his 3otion to /is3issto se#$e as a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence.

In su3 teste/ a&ainst the c#ite#ia lai/ /o%n in Enoas the Cou#t fin/s thatpetitione# Caba/o# file/ a 3otion to /is3iss on the oun/ of $iolation of his#i&ht to spee/7 t#ial not a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence. >e cannot be /ecla#e/ toha$e %ai$e/ his #i&ht to p#esent e$i/ence in his /efense.

On a final note a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence sho#tens the p#ocee/in&s in c#i3inalcases. Caution 3ust ho%e$e# be e=e#cise/? in $ie% of its pe#niciousconse:uence on the #i&ht of the accuse/ to p#esent e$i/ence in his /efensethe se#iousness of the c#i3e cha#&e/ an/ the a$it7 of the penalt7 in$ol$e/.

@>ERE9ORE the petition is 1RANTED the Au&ust * +,,- Decision an/the Octobe# +- +,,- Resolution of the Cou#t of Appeals in CA01.R. SP,,*2 a#e REVERSED an/ SET ASIDE an/ the Au&ust 2 +,,4 O#/e# of the Re&ional T#ial Cou#t of 5ue6on Cit7 B#anch - is NUI9IED. The latte# cou#t is DIRECTED to #esol$e petitione# Antonio Caba/o#'s 3otion to /is3iss

EN BANC&G.R. Nos. 11'()9*(1. +- 16, 199/

PEOPE O! T"E P"IIPPINE#, $etitioner, vs. "ONORABE#ANDIGANBAAN, AN#3ETO 4. "ONRADA, CE!ERINO #. PAREDE#,+R. 5n% GENERO#O #. #AN#AET, res$on%ents.D E C I S I O NRE1AADO !."

Th#ou&h the special ci$il action fo# ce#tio#a#i at ba# petitione# see;s theannul3ent of the #esolution of #espon/ent San/i&anba7an p#o3ul&ate/ onDece3be# ++ 882 %hich /enie/ petitione#s 3otion fo# the /ischa#&e of #espon/ent 1ene#oso S. Sansaet to be utili6e/ as a state %itness an/ its#esolution of Ma#ch ? 88* /en7in& the 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation of itsp#ece/in& /isposition.FGThe #eco#/s sho% that /u#in& the /ates 3ate#ial to this case #espon/ent>on#a/a %as the Cle#; of Cou#t an/ Actin& Stenoaphe# of the 9i#stMunicipal Ci#cuit T#ial Cou#t San 9#ancisco0Buna%an0Rosa#io in A&usan /elSu#. Respon/ent Pa#e/es %as successi$el7 the P#o$incial Atto#ne7 of

A&usan /el Su# then 1o$e#no# of the sa3e p#o$ince an/ is at p#esent aConess3an. Respon/ent Sansaet %as a p#acticin& atto#ne7 %ho se#$e/ ascounsel fo# Pa#e/es in se$e#al instances pe#tinent to the c#i3inal cha#&esin$ol$e/ in the p#esent #ecou#se.The sa3e #eco#/s also #ep#esent that so3eti3e in 8?4 #espon/entPa#e/es applie/ fo# a f#ee patent o$e# ot No. 2,8?0A Pls04? of the Rosa#ioPublic an/ Sub/i$ision Su#$e7. >is application %as app#o$e/ an/ pu#suantto a f#ee patent ante/ to hi3 an o#i&inal ce#tificate of title %as issue/ in hisfa$o# fo# that lot %hich is situate/ in the poblacion of San 9#ancisco A&usan/el Su#.>o%e$e# in 8-


4/49

P#o$incial 9iscal %as ho%e$e# /i#ecte/ b7 the Deput7 Ministe# of !ustice to3o$e fo# the /is3issal of the case on the oun/ inte# alia of p#esc#iptionhence the p#ocee/in&s %e#e te#3inate/.F?G In this c#i3inal case #espon/entPa#e/es %as li;e%ise #ep#esente/ b7 #espon/ent Sansaet as counsel.Nonetheless #espon/entH Pa#e/es %as the#eafte# hale/ befo#e theTano/ba7an fo# p#eli3ina#7 in$esti&ation on the cha#&e that b7 usin& hisfo#3e# position as P#o$incial Atto#ne7 to influence an/ in/uce the Bu#eau of an/s officials to fa$o#abl7 act on his application fo# f#ee patent he ha/

$iolate/ Section 2(a) of Republic Act No. 2,8 as a3en/e/. 9o# the thi#/ti3e #espon/ent Sansaet %as Pa#e/es counsel of #eco#/ the#ein.On Au&ust +8 8-- the Tano/ba7an issue/ a #esolutionF-G #eco33en/in&the c#i3inal p#osecution of #espon/ent Pa#e/es. Att7. Sansaet as counsel fo# his afo#ena3e/ co0#espon/ent 3o$e/ fo# #econsi/e#ation an/ because of its le&al si&nificance in this case %e :uote so3e of his alle&ations in that3otion"= = = #espon/ent ha/ been cha#&e/ al#ea/7 b7 the co3plainants befo#e theMunicipal Ci#cuit Cou#t of San 9#ancisco A&usan /el Su# %ent to ail on/etention in 8-* un/e# the sa3e set of facts an/ the sa3e e$i/ence = = =but sai/ case afte# a##ai&n3ent %as o#/e#e/ /is3isse/ b7 the cou#t upon#eco33en/ation of the Depa#t3ent of !ustice. Cop7 of the /is3issal o#/e#ce#tificate of a##ai&n3ent an/ the #eco33en/ation of the Depa#t3ent of !ustice a#e he#eto attache/ fo# #ea/7 #efe#ence thus the filin& of this case%ill be a case of /ouble eopa#/7 fo# #espon/ent he#ein = = =.F8G (Italicssupplie/.)

A c#i3inal case %as subse:uentl7 file/ %ith the San/i&anba7anF,G cha#&in&#espon/ent Pa#e/es %ith a $iolation of Section 2(a) of Republic Act No. 2,8as a3en/e/. >o%e$e# a 3otion to :uash file/ b7 the /efense %as late# ante/ in #espon/ent cou#ts #esolution of Au&ust 88FG an/ the case%as /is3isse/ on the oun/ of p#esc#iption.On !anua#7 +2 88, one Teofilo 1elacio a ta=pa7e# %ho ha/ initiate/ thepe#u#7 an/ aft cha#&es a&ainst #espon/ent Pa#e/es sent a lette# to theO3bu/s3an see;in& the in$esti&ation of the th#ee #espon/ents he#ein fo# falsification of public /ocu3ents.F+G >e clai3e/ that #espon/ent >on#a/a inconspi#ac7 %ith his he#ein co0#espon/ents si3ulate/ an/ ce#tifie/ as t#uecopies ce#tain /ocu3ents pu#po#tin& to be a notice of a##ai&n3ent /ate/!ul7 8-


5/49

Unfo#tunatel7 fo# the p#osecution #espon/ent San/i&anba7an he%in& to thetheo#7 of the atto#ne70client p#i$ile&e a/$e#te/ to b7 the O3bu/s3an an/in$o;e/ b7 the t%o othe# p#i$ate #espon/ents in thei# opposition to thep#osecutions 3otion #esol$e/ to /en7 the /esi#e/ /ischa#&e on this#atiocination"9#o3 the e$i/ence a//uce/ the opposition %as able to establish that clientan/ la%7e# #elationship e=iste/ bet%een Att7. Sansaet an/ Cefe#ino Pa#e/es!#. befo#e /u#in& an/ afte# the pe#io/ alle&e/ in the info#3ation. In $ie% of such #elationship the facts su##oun/in& the case an/ othe# confi/ential3atte# 3ust ha$e been /isclose/ b7 accuse/ Pa#e/es as client to accuse/Sansaet as his la%7e# in his p#ofessional capacit7. The#efo#e the testi3on7of Att7. Sansaet on the facts su##oun/in& the offense cha#&e/ in theinfo#3ation is p#i$ile&e/.F8G

Reconsi/e#ation of sai/ #esolution ha$in& been li;e%ise /enie/F+,G thecont#o$e#s7 %as ele$ate/ to this Cou#t b7 the p#osecution in an o#i&inalaction fo# the issuance of the e=t#ao#/ina#7 %#it of ce#tio#a#i a&ainst#espon/ent San/i&anba7an.The p#incipal issues on %hich the #esolution of the petition at ba# actuall7tu#ns a#e the#efo#e () %hethe# o# not the p#oecte/ testi3on7 of #espon/entSansaet as p#opose/ state %itness is ba##e/ b7 the atto#ne70client p#i$ile&ean/ (+) %hethe# o# not as a conse:uence the#eof he is eli&ible fo# /ischa#&eto testif7 as a pa#ticeps c#i3inis.I

As al#ea/7 state/ #espon/ent San/i&anba7an #ule/ that /ue to the la%7e#0client #elationship %hich e=iste/ bet%een he#ein #espon/ents Pa#e/es an/Sansaet /u#in& the #ele$ant pe#io/s the facts su##oun/in& the case an/othe# confi/ential 3atte#s 3ust ha$e been /isclose/ b7 #espon/ent Pa#e/esas client to #espon/ent Sansaet as his la%7e#. Acco#/in&l7 it foun/ no#eason to /iscuss it fu#the# since Att7. Sansaet cannot be p#esente/ as a%itness a&ainst accuse/ Cefe#ino S. Pa#e/es !#. %ithout the latte#s consent.F+GThe Cou#t is of a cont#a#7 pe#suasion. The atto#ne70client p#i$ile&e cannotappl7 in these cases as the facts the#eof an/ the actuations of both#espon/ents the#ein constitute an e=ception to the #ule. 9o# a clea#e# un/e#stan/in& of that e$i/ential #ule %e %ill fi#st s%eep asi/e so3e/ist#actin& 3ental cob%ebs in these cases.. It 3a7 co##ectl7 be assu3e/ that the#e %as a confi/ential co33unication3a/e b7 Pa#e/es to Sansaet in connection %ith C#i3inal Cases Nos. ??8082 fo# falsification befo#e #espon/ent cou#t an/ this 3a7 #easonabl7 bee=pecte/ since Pa#e/es %as the accuse/ an/ Sansaet his counsel the#ein.In/ee/ the fact that Sansaet %as calle/ to %itness the p#epa#ation of thefalsifie/ /ocu3ents b7 Pa#e/es an/ >on#a/a %as as elo:uent aco33unication if not 3o#e than $e#bal state3ents bein& 3a/e to hi3 b7Pa#e/es as to the fact an/ pu#pose of such falsification. It is si&nificant that

the e$i/entia#7 #ule on this point has al%a7s #efe##e/ to an7 co33unication%ithout /istinction o# :ualification.F++GIn the A3e#ican u#is/iction f#o3 %hich ou# p#esent e$i/ential #ule %as ta;enthe#e is no pa#ticula# 3o/e b7 %hich a confi/ential co33unication shall be3a/e b7 a client to his atto#ne7. The p#i$ile&e is not confine/ to $e#bal o# %#itten co33unications 3a/e b7 the client to his atto#ne7 but e=ten/s as %ellto info#3ation co33unicate/ b7 the client to the atto#ne7 b7 othe# 3eans.F+2GNo# can it be p#eten/e/ that /u#in& the enti#e p#ocess consi/e#in& thei# pastan/ e=istin& #elations as counsel an/ client an/ fu#the# in $ie% of thepu#pose fo# %hich such falsifie/ /ocu3ents %e#e p#epa#e/ no %o#/ at allpasse/ bet%een Pa#e/es an/ Sansaet on the subect 3atte# of that c#i3inalact. The clinche# fo# this conclusion is the un/ispute/ fact that sai//ocu3ents %e#e the#eafte# file/ b7 Sansaet in behalf of Pa#e/es as anne=esto the 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation in the p#eli3ina#7 in$esti&ation of the aftcase befo#e the Tano/ba7an.F+*G Also the acts an/ %o#/s of the pa#ties/u#in& the pe#io/ %hen the /ocu3ents %e#e bein& falsifie/ %e#e necessa#il7confi/ential since Pa#e/es %oul/ not ha$e in$ite/ Sansaet to his house an/allo%e/ hi3 to %itness the sa3e e=cept un/e# con/itions of sec#ec7 an/confi/ence.+. It is postulate/ that /espite such co3plicit7 of Sansaet at the instance of Pa#e/es in the c#i3inal act fo# %hich the latte# stan/s cha#&e/ a /istinction3ust be 3a/e bet%een confi/ential co33unications #elatin& to past c#i3esal#ea/7 co33itte/ an/ futu#e c#i3es inten/e/ to be co33itte/ b7 the client.Co#olla#il7 it is a/3itte/ that the announce/ intention of a client to co33it ac#i3e is not inclu/e/ %ithin the confi/ences %hich his atto#ne7 is boun/ to#espect. Respon/ent cou#t appea#s ho%e$e# to belie$e that in the instantcase it is /ealin& %ith a past c#i3e an/ that #espon/ent Sansaet is set totestif7 on alle&e/ c#i3inal acts of #espon/ents Pa#e/es an/ >on#a/a thatha$e al#ea/7 been co33itte/ an/ consu33ate/.The Cou#t #ep#obates the last assu3ption %hich is fla%e/ b7 a so3e%hatinaccu#ate basis. It is t#ue that b7 no% insofa# as the falsifications to betestifie/ to in #espon/ent cou#t a#e conce#ne/ those c#i3es %e#e necessa#il7co33itte/ in the past. But fo# the application of the atto#ne70client p#i$ile&eho%e$e# the pe#io/ to be consi/e#e/ is the /ate %hen the p#i$ile&e/co33unication %as 3a/e b7 the client to the atto#ne7 in #elation to eithe# ac#i3e co33itte/ in the past o# %ith #espect to a c#i3e inten/e/ to beco33itte/ in the futu#e. In othe# %o#/s if the client see;s his la%7e#s a/$ice%ith #espect to a c#i3e that the fo#3e# has the#etofo#e co33itte/ he is &i$enthe p#otection of a $i#tual confessional seal %hich the atto#ne70client p#i$ile&e/ecla#es cannot be b#o;en b7 the atto#ne7 %ithout the clients consent. Thesa3e p#i$ile&e/ confi/entialit7 ho%e$e# /oes not attach %ith #e&a#/ to ac#i3e %hich a client inten/s to co33it the#eafte# o# in the futu#e an/ fo# pu#poses of %hich he see;s the la%7e#s a/$ice.State3ents an/ co33unications #e&a#/in& the co33ission of a c#i3e

al#ea/7 co33itte/ 3a/e b7 a pa#t7 %ho co33itte/ it to an atto#ne7

5


6/49

consulte/ as such a#e p#i$ile&e/ co33unications. Cont#a#il7 the unb#o;enst#ea3 of u/icial /icta is to the effect that co33unications bet%een atto#ne7an/ client ha$in& to /o %ith the clients conte3plate/ c#i3inal acts o# in ai/o# fu#the#ance the#eof a#e not co$e#e/ b7 the cloa; of p#i$ile&es o#/ina#il7e=istin& in #efe#ence to co33unications bet%een atto#ne7 an/ client.F+on#a/a eithe# %ith theacti$e o# passi$e pa#ticipation of Sansaet %e#e about to falsif7 o# in thep#ocess of falsif7in& the /ocu3ents %hich %e#e late# file/ in the Tano/ba7anb7 Sansaet an/ cul3inate/ in the c#i3inal cha#&es no% pen/in& in#espon/ent San/i&anba7an. Clea#l7 the#efo#e the confi/entialco33unications thus 3a/e b7 Pa#e/es to Sansaet %e#e fo# pu#poses of an/in #efe#ence to the c#i3e of falsification %hich ha/ not 7et been co33itte/ inthe past b7 Pa#e/es but %hich he in confe/e#ac7 %ith his p#esent co0#espon/ents late# co33itte/. >a$in& been 3a/e fo# pu#poses of a futu#eoffense those co33unications a#e outsi/e the pale of the atto#ne70clientp#i$ile&e.*. 9u#the#3o#e Sansaet %as hi3self a conspi#ato# in the co33ission of thatc#i3e of falsification %hich he Pa#e/es an/ >on#a/a concocte/ an/ foiste/upon the autho#ities. It is %ell settle/ that in o#/e# that a co33unicationbet%een a la%7e# an/ his client 3a7 be p#i$ile&e/ it 3ust be fo# a la%fulpu#pose o# in fu#the#ance of a la%ful en/. The e=istence of an unla%fulpu#pose p#e$ents the p#i$ile&e f#o3 attachin&.F+4G In fact it has also beenpointe/ out to the Cou#t that the p#osecution of the hono#able #elation of atto#ne7 an/ client %ill not be pe#3itte/ un/e# the &uise of p#i$ile&e an/e$e#7 co33unication 3a/e to an atto#ne7 b7 a client fo# a c#i3inal pu#poseis a conspi#ac7 o# atte3pt at a conspi#ac7 %hich is not onl7 la%ful to /i$ul&ebut %hich the atto#ne7 un/e# ce#tain ci#cu3stances 3a7 be boun/ to /iscloseat once in the inte#est of ustice.F+?GIt is e$i/ent the#efo#e that it %as e##o# fo# #espon/ent San/i&anba7an toinsist that such unla%ful co33unications inten/e/ fo# an ille&al pu#posecont#i$e/ b7 conspi#ato#s a#e nonetheless co$e#e/ b7 the so0calle/ 3antle of p#i$ile&e. To p#e$ent a conni$in& counsel f#o3 #e$ealin& the &enesis of ac#i3e %hich %as late# co33itte/ pu#suant to a conspi#ac7 because of theobection the#eto of his conspi#in& client %oul/ be one of the %o#st t#a$estiesin the #ules of e$i/ence an/ p#actice in the noble p#ofession of la%.IIOn the fo#e&oin& p#e3ises %e no% p#ocee/ to the conse:uential in:ui#7 asto %hethe# #espon/ent Sansaet :ualifies as a pa#ticeps c#i3inis fo# /ischa#&e f#o3 the c#i3inal p#osecution in o#/e# to testif7 fo# the State.Pa#entheticall7 #espon/ent cou#t ha$in& a##i$e/ at a cont#a#7 conclusion onthe p#ece/in& issue /i/ not pass upon this secon/ aspect an/ the #elief sou&ht b7 the p#osecution %hich a#e no% sub3itte/ fo# ou# #esolution in the

petition at ba#. @e shall ho%e$e# fi#st /ispose li;e%ise of so3e ancilla#7:uestions #e:ui#in& p#elu/ial cla#ification.. The fact that #espon/ent San/i&anba7an /i/ not full7 pass upon the :ue#7as to %hethe# o# not #espon/ent Sansaet %as :ualifie/ to be a state %itnessnee/ not p#e$ent this Cou#t f#o3 #esol$in& that issue as p#a7e/ fo# b7petitione#. @he#e the /ete#3inati$e facts an/ e$i/ence ha$e been sub3itte/to this Cou#t such that it is in a position to finall7 #esol$e the /ispute it %ill bein the pu#suance of the en/s of ustice an/ the e=pe/itious a/3inist#ationthe#eof to #esol$e the case on the 3e#its instea/ of #e3an/in& it to the t#ialcou#t.F+-G+. A #ese#$ation is #aise/ o$e# the fact that the th#ee p#i$ate #espon/ents he#estan/ cha#&e/ in th#ee sepa#ate info#3ations. It %ill be #ecalle/ that in its#esolution of 9eb#ua#7 +* 88+ the O3bu/s3an #eco33en/e/ the filin& of c#i3inal cha#&es fo# falsification of public /ocu3ents a&ainst all the#espon/ents he#ein. That #esolution %as affi#3e/ but #epo#te/l7 in o#/e# toob$iate fu#the# cont#o$e#s7 one info#3ation %as file/ a&ainst each of theth#ee #espon/ents he#e #esultin& in th#ee info#3ations fo# the sa3e acts of falsification.This technicalit7 %as ho%e$e# sufficientl7 e=plaine/ a%a7 /u#in& the/elibe#ations in this case b7 the follo%in& /iscussion the#eof b7 M#. !usticeDa$i/e to %it"

Assu3in& no substanti$e i3pe/i3ent e=ists to bloc; Sansaets /ischa#&e asstate %itness he can ne$e#theless be /ischa#&e/ e$en if in/icte/ un/e# asepa#ate info#3ation. I suppose the th#ee cases %e#e consoli/ate/ fo# ointt#ial since the7 %e#e all #affle/ to the Secon/ Di$ision of the San/i&anba7an.Section + Rule JV of the Re$ise/ Rules of the San/i&anba7an allo%sconsoli/ation in onl7 one Di$ision of cases a#isin& f#o3 the sa3e inci/ent o# se#ies of inci/ents o# in$ol$in& co33on :uestions of la% an/ fact.

Acco#/in&l7 fo# all le&al intents an/ pu#poses Sansaet stoo/ as co0accuse/an/ he coul/ be /ischa#&e/ as state %itness. It is of no 3o3ent that he %ascha#&e/ sepa#atel7 f#o3 his co0accuse/. @hile Section 8 of Rule 8 of the8-< Rules of C#i3inal P#oce/u#e uses the %o#/ ointl7 %hich %as absent inthe ol/ p#o$ision the consoli/ate/ an/ oint t#ial has the effect of 3a;in& theth#ee accuse/ co0accuse/ o# oint /efen/ants especiall7 consi/e#in& thatthe7 a#e cha#&e/ fo# the sa3e offense. In c#i3inal la% pe#sons in/icte/ fo# the sa3e offense an/ t#ie/ to&ethe# a#e calle/ oint /efen/ants.

As li;e%ise sub3itte/ the#efo# b7 M#. !ustice 9#ancisco alon& the sa3e $einthe#e ha$in& been a consoli/ation of the th#ee cases the se$e#al actions lostthei# sepa#ate i/entities an/ beca3e a sin&le action in %hich a sin&le

u/&3ent is #en/e#e/ the sa3e as if the /iffe#ent causes of action in$ol$e/ha/ o#i&inall7 been oine/ in a sin&le action.F+8GIn/ee/ the fo#3e# p#o$ision of the Rules #efe##in& to the situation (%)hen t%oo# 3o#e pe#sons a#e cha#&e/ %ith the co33ission of a ce#tain offense %astoo b#oa/ an/ in/efinite hence the %o#/ oint %as a//e/ to in/icate the

i/entit7 of the cha#&e an/ the fact that the accuse/ a#e all to&ethe# cha#&e/

6


7/49

the#e%ith substantiall7 in the sa3e 3anne# in point of co33ission an/ ti3e.The %o#/ oint 3eans co33on to t%o o# 3o#e as in$ol$in& the unite/ acti$it7of t%o o# 3o#e o# /one o# p#o/uce/ b7 t%o o# 3o#e %o#;in& to&ethe# o# sha#e/ b7 o# affectin& t%o o# 3o#e.F2,G >a/ it been inten/e/ that all theaccuse/ shoul/ al%a7s be in/icte/ in one an/ the sa3e info#3ation theRules coul/ ha$e sai/ so %ith facilit7 but it /i/ not so #e:ui#e in consi/e#ationof the ci#cu3stances obtainin& in the p#esent case an/ the p#oble3s that3a7 a#ise f#o3 a3en/in& the info#3ation. Afte# all the pu#pose of the Rulecan be achie$e/ b7 consoli/ation of the cases as an alte#nati$e 3o/e.+. @e ha$e ea#lie# hel/ that Sansaet %as a conspi#ato# in the c#i3e of falsification an/ the #ule is that since in a conspi#ac7 the act of one is the actof all the sa3e penalt7 shall be i3pose/ on all 3e3be#s of the conspi#ac7.No% one of the #e:ui#e3ents fo# a state %itness is that he /oes not appea# to be the 3ost &uilt7.F2G not that he 3ust be the least &uilt7F2+G as is so oftene##oneousl7 f#a3e/ o# sub3itte/. The :ue#7 %oul/ then be %hethe# anaccuse/ %ho %as hel/ &uilt7 b7 #eason of 3e3be#ship in a conspi#ac7 iseli&ible to be a state %itness.To be su#e in People $s. Ra3i#e6 et al.F22G %e fin/ this obite#"It appea#s that Apolonio Ba&ispas %as the #eal 3aste#3in/. It is belie$ablethat he pe#sua/e/ the othe#s to #ob Pate#no not to ;ill hi3 fo# a p#o3ise/fee. Althou&h he /i/ not actuall7 co33it an7 of the stabbin&s it %as a3ista;e to /ischa#&e Ba&ispas as a state %itness. All the pe#pet#ato#s of theoffense inclu/in& hi3 %e#e boun/ in a conspi#ac7 that 3a/e the3 e:uall7&uilt7.

>o%e$e# p#io# the#eto in People $s. Ro=as et al.F2*G t%o conspi#ato#scha#&e/ %ith fi$e othe#s in th#ee sepa#ate info#3ations fo# 3ultiple 3u#/e# %e#e /ischa#&e/ an/ use/ as state %itnesses a&ainst thei# confe/e#ates.Subse:uent the#eto in u&tu et al. $s. Cou#t of Appeals et al.F2


8/49

Also this is an affai# of substanti$e la% %hich shoul/ not be e:uate/ %ith thep#oce/u#al #ule on the /ischa#&e of pa#ticeps c#i3inis. This a/ecti$e /e$iceis base/ on othe# consi/e#ations such as the nee/ fo# &i$in& i33unit7 toone of the3 in o#/e# that not all shall escape an/ the u/icial e=pe#ience thatthe can/i/ a/3ission of an accuse/ #e&a#/in& his pa#ticipation is a &ua#ant7that he %ill testif7 t#uthfull7. 9o# those #easons the Rules p#o$i/e fo# ce#tain:ualif7in& c#ite#ia %hich a&ain a#e base/ on u/icial e=pe#ience /istille/ intoa u/&3ental polic7.IIIThe Cou#t is #easonabl7 con$ince/ an/ so hol/s that the othe# #e:uisites fo# the /ischa#&e of #espon/ent Sansaet as a state %itness a#e p#esent an/shoul/ ha$e been fa$o#abl7 app#eciate/ b7 the San/i&anba7an.Respon/ent Sansaet is the onl7 coope#ati$e e7e%itness to the actualco33ission of the falsification cha#&e/ in the c#i3inal cases pen/in& befo#e#espon/ent cou#t an/ the p#osecution is face/ %ith the fo#3i/able tas; of establishin& the &uilt of the t%o othe# co0#espon/ents %ho stea/fastl7 /en7the cha#&e an/ stoutl7 p#otest thei# innocence. The#e is thus no othe# /i#ecte$i/ence a$ailable fo# the p#osecution of the case hence the#e is absolutenecessit7 fo# the testi3on7 of Sansaet %hose /ischa#&e is sou&ht p#ecisel7fo# that pu#pose. Sai/ #espon/ent has in/icate/ his confo#3it7 the#eto an/has fo# the pu#poses #e:ui#e/ b7 the Rules /etaile/ the substance of hisp#oecte/ testi3on7 in his Affi/a$it of E=planations an/ Rectifications.>is testi3on7 can be substantiall7 co##obo#ate/ on its 3ate#ial points b7#eputable %itnesses i/entifie/ in the basic petition %ith a /i&est of thei# p#ospecti$e testi3onies as follo%s" !u/&e Ci#iaco C. A#io Municipal Ci#cuitT#ial Cou#t in San 9#ancisco A&usan /el Su# P#o$incial P#osecuto# an/Deputi6e/ O3bu/s3an P#osecuto# Clau/io A. Nistal Teofilo 1elacio p#i$ateco3plainant %ho initiate/ the c#i3inal cases th#ou&h his lette#0co3plaint

Albe#to !u$ilan of the San&&unian& Ba7an of San 9e#nan/o A&usan /el Su#%ho pa#ticipate/ in the #esolution as;in& thei# P#o$incial 1o$e#no# to file theapp#op#iate case a&ainst #espon/ent Pa#e/es an/ 9#ancisco Macalit %hoobtaine/ the ce#tification of non0a##ai&n3ent f#o3 !u/&e A#io.On the final #e:ui#e3ent of the Rules it /oes not appea# that #espon/ent

Sansaet has at an7 ti3e been con$icte/ of an7 offense in$ol$in& 3o#altu#pitu/e. Thus %ith the confluence of all the #e:ui#e3ents fo# the /ischa#&eof this #espon/ent both the Special P#osecuto# an/ the Solicito# 1ene#alst#on&l7 u#&e an/ p#opose that he be allo%e/ to testif7 as a state %itness.This Cou#t is not una%a#e of the /oct#inal #ule that on this p#oce/u#al aspectthe p#osecution 3a7 p#opose but it is fo# the t#ial cou#t in the e=e#cise of itssoun/ /isc#etion to /ete#3ine the 3e#its of the p#oposal an/ 3a;e theco##espon/in& /isposition. It 3ust be e3phasi6e/ ho%e$e# that such/isc#etion shoul/ ha$e been e=e#cise/ an/ the /isposition ta;en on a holistic$ie% of all the facts an/ issues he#ein /iscusse/ an/ not 3e#el7 on the soleissue of the applicabilit7 of the atto#ne70client p#i$ile&e.This chan&e of hea#t an/ /i#ection #espon/ent San/i&anba7an e$entuall7

assu3e/ afte# the #eti#e3ent of t%o 3e3be#s of its Secon/ Di$ision F2?Gan/

the #econstitution the#eof. In an in$e#sel7 anticli3actic Manifestation an/Co33ent F2-G /ate/ !une * 88


9/49

n5res*#5nti5ono#able San/i&anba7an fo# p#e0

t#ial pu#poses.F


10/49

On !anua#7 + +,,* P#osecuto# Danilo 9. Salin/on& #este/ the case base/on the !oint Stipulation of 9acts an/ %ai$e/ the p#esentation of testi3onial o# /ocu3enta#7 e$i/ence fo# the p#osecution.F?G The#eafte# petitione# file/ on !anua#7 8 +,,* a Motion fo# ea$e to 9ileDe3u##e# to E$i/ence because the p#osecution faile/ to p#esent 3a#; o# offe# e$i/ence that %oul/ substantiate the cha#&e a&ainst hi3. Petitione# asse#te/ that the !oint Stipulation of 9acts is ina/3issible because it lac;shis si&natu#e. E$en if the sa3e be a/3itte/ the info#3ation is /is3issablefo# failu#e of the p#osecution to sub3it e$i/ence to establish the inu#7 cause/to the &o$e#n3ent an/ the p#esence of 3anifest pa#tialit7 e$i/ent ba/ faitho# oss ine=cusable ne&li&ence in the appoint3ent of C#esente U3bao%hich a#e a3on& the essential ele3ents of the c#i3e of $iolation of Section2(e) of RA No. 2,8.F-G The p#osecution no% #ep#esente/ b7 P#osecuto# A&nes B. Autencio0Da:uisfile/ an OppositionCo33ent alle&in& that petitione#s Motion fo# ea$e to 9ileDe3u##e# to E$i/ence is p#e3atu#e because the p#osecution has 7et tofo#3all7 offe# the !oint Stipulation of 9acts.F8G On 9eb#ua#7 +, +,,* the San/i&anba7an #eite#ate/ its Ma#ch +4 +,,2Resolution /i#ectin& petitione# an/ counsels to si&n the !oint Stipulation of 9acts.F,G Petitione# file/ a Manifestation %ith Motion fo# Reconsi/e#ationFGclai3in& that his fo#3e# counsel %as not autho#i6e/ to ente# into an7aee3ent an/ that he ca3e to ;no% of the e=istence of sai/ stipulationsonl7 on !anua#7 + +,,*. On Ma#ch +,,* the San/i&anba7an issue/ a P#e0t#ial O#/e#F+Ge3bo/7in& the !oint Stipulation of 9acts. Consi/e#in& petitione#s #efusal to ac;no%le/&e the !oint Stipulation of 9actso# to si&n the P#e0t#ial O#/e# the San/i&anba7an issue/ the assaile/ !une

* +,,* O#/e# #ecallin& the P#e0t#ial O#/e# /en7in& the 3otion fo# lea$e tofile /e3u##e# an/ settin& the case fo# p#esentation of the p#osecutionse$i/ence thus This afte#noon is suppose/ to be the initial p#esentation of the /efensee$i/ence. P#osecuto# Danilo 9. Salin/on& fo#3e# han/lin& p#osecuto# of thiscase #este/ his case on the basis of the P#e0T#ial O#/e# issue/ b7 this Cou#t.>o%e$e# accuse/ Ro/olfo Valencia #efuse/ to si&n the p#e0t#ial o#/e# as pe# his 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation to %hich P#osecuto# A&nes Autencio Da:uisco33ente/ that since the accuse/ #efuse/ to si&n the p#e0t#ial o#/e# that thesa3e be ab#o&ate/ an/ that t#ial on the 3e#its ensue/. Conse:uentl7 theP#e0T#ial O#/e# issue/ b7 this Cou#t on Ma#ch +,,* is he#eb7 #ecalle/

an/ set asi/e. In $ie% of the #efusal of the accuse/ to ente# into an7

stipulation of facts let this case be sche/ule/ fo# t#ial on the 3e#its. Thep#esentation of p#osecutions e$i/ence is he#eb7 sche/ule/ on Au&ust 2 an/Septe3be# +,,* at +",, ocloc; in the afte#noon. The /e3u##e# to e$i/encefile/ b7 the accuse/ is the#efo#e consi/e#e/ p#e3atu#e an/ is he#eb7 st#ic;enout of the #eco#/s.F2G Petitione#s 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation %as /enie/ on !ul7 +- +,,* asfollo%s" The Motion fo# Reconsi/e#ation (of !une * +,,* O#/e#) /ate/ !une +8+,,* file/ b7 accuse/ th#u counsels %hich 3et $i&o#ous opposition f#o3 thep#osecutions Co33entOpposition /ate/ !ul7 4 +,,* is /enie/ fo# lac; of 3e#it. As clea#l7 state/ in the O#/e# of !une * +,,* the case fo# thep#osecution %as #e0opene/ because of the #efusal of accuse/ to si&n thep#e0t#ial o#/e# on the basis of %hich the p#osecution #este/ its case. !usticean/ fai#ness /e3an/ the #e0openin& of the e$i/ence fo# the p#osecutionbecause of the un%a##ante/ act of the accuse/ in #efusin& to si&n the p#e0t#ial o#/e#.F*G >ence the instant petition conten/in& that the San/i&anba7an a$el7abuse/ its /isc#etion in issuin& the assaile/ !une * +,,* O#/e# an/ !ul7+- +,,* Resolution. Mean%hile the#e bein& no te3po#a#7 #est#ainin& o#/e# no# p#eli3ina#7inunction issue/ b7 this Cou#t the p#osecution p#ocee/e/ %ith thep#esentation of its e$i/ence.F


11/49

A /e3u##e# to e$i/ence tests the sufficienc7 o# insufficienc7 of thep#osecutions e$i/ence. As such a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence o# a 3otion fo# lea$e to file the sa3e 3ust be file/ afte# the p#osecution #ests its case. Butbefo#e an e$i/ence 3a7 be a/3itte/ the #ules #e:ui#e that the sa3e befo#3all7 offe#e/ othe#%ise it cannot be consi/e#e/ b7 the cou#t. A p#io# fo#3al offe# of e$i/ence conclu/es the case fo# the p#osecution an//ete#3ines the ti3eliness of the filin& of a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence.

As hel/ in A:uino $. SisonF4G the 3otion to /is3iss fo# insufficienc7 of e$i/ence file/ b7 the accuse/ afte# the conclusion of the c#oss0e=a3inationof the %itness fo# the p#osecution is p#e3atu#e because the latte# is still inthe p#ocess of p#esentin& e$i/ence. The che3ist#7 #epo#t #elie/ upon b7 thecou#t in antin& the 3otion to /is3iss %as /is#e&a#/e/ because it %as notp#ope#l7 i/entifie/ o# fo#3all7 offe#e/ as e$i/ence. Ve#il7 until such ti3e thatthe p#osecution close/ its e$i/ence the /efense cannot be consi/e#e/ toha$e seasonabl7 file/ a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence o# a 3otion fo# lea$e to file thesa3e. In the p#esent case petitione#s 3otion fo# lea$e to file /e3u##e# to e$i/enceis p#e3atu#e because the p#osecution ha/ 7et to fo#3all7 #est its case. @henthe 3otion %as file/ on !anua#7 8 +,,* the latte# ha/ not 7et 3a#;e/ no# fo#3all7 offe#e/ the !oint Stipulation of 9acts as e$i/ence. It isinconse:uential that petitione# #ecei$e/ b7 3ail on !anua#7 +? +,,* a3otion an/ fo#3al offe# of e$i/ence /ate/ !anua#7 +, +,,* f#o3 P#osecuto# Salin/on&F?G because as aptl7 obse#$e/ b7 the Office of the O3bu/s3anthe #eco#/s of the San/i&anba7an bea# no such 3otion o# fo#3al offe# of e$i/ence file/ b7 the p#osecution. The 3otion an/ fo#3al offe# foun/ in the#eco#/s a#e those attache/ as Anne= BF-G to petitione#s Manifestation %ithMotion fo# Reconsi/e#ationF8G an/ not copies file/ b7 the p#osecution.Un/e# Section + Rule 2 of the Rules of Cou#t the filin& of a plea/in& o# pape# shall be p#o$e/ b7 its e=istence in the case #eco#/s. The absence of the 3otion to #est the case in the #eco#/s of the San/i&anba7an an/ the

failu#e to offe# the !oint Stipulation of 9acts p#o$e that the p#osecution /i/ notfo#3all7 #est o# conclu/e the p#esentation of its e$i/ence #en/e#in&petitione#s 3otion fo# lea$e to file /e3u##e# to e$i/ence p#e3atu#e.

At an7 #ate ha/ the p#osecution actuall7 file/ sai/ 3otion an/ fo#3all7offe#e/ the e$i/ence befo#e the San/i&anba7an the 3otion fo# lea$e to file/e3u##e# to e$i/ence still suffe#s p#e3atu#it7 because it %as file/ on !anua#78 +,,* o# one /a7 befo#e the /ate of the 3otion an/ offe# i.e. !anua#7 +,+,,*. In fact e$en petitione# a/3itte/ in his 3otion fo# lea$e to file /e3u##e# to e$i/ence that the p#osecution faile/ to 3a#; an/ offe# an7 e$i/encea&ainst hi3.F+,G

Anent the secon/ issue %e fin/ that the t#ial cou#t /i/ not abuse its/isc#etion in antin& the p#osecutions #e:uest to p#esent a//itionale$i/ence. A/3ission of a//itional e$i/ence is a//#esse/ to the soun//isc#etion of the t#ial cou#t. Consi/e#able latitu/e is allo%e/ an/ such/isc#etion %ill not be /istu#be/ absent a fin/in& that the accuse/ %as /enie//ue p#ocess of la%. As ea#l7 as the 8,? case of Unite/ States $. CincoF+Gthe Cou#t has consistentl7 uphel/ such p#e#o&ati$e of the t#ial cou#t thus ... The u/&es of the Cou#ts of 9i#st Instance a#e u/&es of both fact an/ la%an/ afte# hea#in& all the e$i/ence a//uce/ b7 the atto#ne7s if the cou#t is notsatisfie/ %e see no #eason %h7 he shoul/ not be pe#3itte/ to call a//itional%itnesses fo# the pu#pose of satisf7in& his 3in/ upon an7 :uestionsp#esente/ /u#in& the t#ial of the case. In/ee/ in the fu#the#ance of ustice the cou#t 3a7 ant the pa#ties theoppo#tunit7 to a//uce a//itional e$i/ence bea#in& upon the 3ain issue in:uestion.F++G Thus in >on. Ve&a etc. et al. $. >on. Panis etc. et al.F+2G theCou#t sustaine/ the o#/e# of the t#ial cou#t allo%in& the p#osecution to p#esenta//itional e$i/ence afte# it ha/ offe#e/ its e$i/ence an/ #este/ its case an/afte# the /efense file/ a 3otion to /is3iss. It %as st#esse/ the#ein that %hilethe p#osecution ha/ #este/ the t#ial %as not 7et te#3inate/ an/ the case %asstill un/e# the cont#ol an/ u#is/iction of the cou#t. >ence in the e=e#cise of its /isc#etion the t#ial cou#t 3a7 #ecei$e a//itional e$i/ence. @e also hel/ in People $. !anua#ioF+*G that st#ict obse#$ance of the o#/e# of t#ial o# t#ial p#oce/u#e outline/ in Rule 8 of the Rules of Cou#t /epen/supon the ci#cu3stance obtainin& in each case at the /isc#etion of the t#ial

u/&e. Citin& Unite/ States $. Al$ia#F+ence the cou#t 3a7 allo% the p#osecuto# e$en afte# he has #este/ his caseo# afte# the /efense 3o$e/ fo# /is3issal to p#esent in$olunta#il7 o3itte/e$i/ence.F+4G It 3ust be e3phasi6e/ that the p#i3a#7 consi/e#ation in allo%in& the#eopenin& of a case is fo# the accuse/ to ha$e his /a7 in cou#t an/ theoppo#tunit7 to p#esent counte# e$i/ence. Thus

11


12/49

As a #ule the 3atte# of #eopenin& of a case fo# #eception of fu#the# e$i/enceafte# eithe# p#osecution o# /efense has #este/ its case is %ithin the /isc#etionof the t#ial cou#t. >o%e$e# a concession to a #eopenin& 3ust not p#eu/icethe accuse/ o# /en7 hi3 the oppo#tunit7 to int#o/uce counte# e$i/ence. In U.S. $s. Base %e hel/ that a t#ial cou#t is not in e##o# if it opts to #eopenthe p#ocee/in&s of a case e$en afte# both si/es ha/ #este/ an/ the casesub3itte/ fo# /ecision b7 the callin& of a//itional %itnesses o# #ecallin& of %itnesses so as to satisf7 the u/&es 3in/ %ith #efe#ence to pa#ticula# factsin$ol$e/ in the case. A u/&e cannot be faulte/ shoul/ he #e:ui#e a 3ate#ial%itness to co3plete his testi3on7 %hich is %hat happene/ in this case. It isbut p#ope# that the u/&es 3in/ be satisfie/ on an7 an/ all :uestionsp#esente/ /u#in& the t#ial in o#/e# to se#$e the cause of ustice.

Appellants clai3 that the t#ial cou#ts concession to #eopen the case un/ul7p#eu/ice/ hi3 is not %ell ta;en. @e note that appellant ha/ e$e#7oppo#tunit7 to p#esent his e$i/ence to suppo#t his case o# to #efute thep#osecutions e$i/ence point0b70point afte# the p#osecution ha/ #este/ itscase. In sho#t appellant %as ne$e# /ep#i$e/ of his /a7 in cou#t. A /a7 incou#t is the touchstone of the #i&ht to /ue p#ocess in c#i3inal ustice. Thus%e a#e unable to hol/ that a a$e abuse of /isc#etion %as co33itte/ b7 thet#ial cou#t %hen it o#/e#e/ the so0calle/ #eopenin& in o#/e# to co3plete thetesti3on7 of a p#osecution %itness.F+?G In the case at ba# petitione# cannot clai3 /enial of /ue p#ocess because he%ill ha$e the oppo#tunit7 to contest the e$i/ence a//uce/ a&ainst hi3 an/ top#o$e his /efenses afte# the p#osecution conclu/es the p#esentation of itse$i/ence. Mo#eo$e# the o#/e# of the t#ial cou#t antin& the #eception of a//itional e$i/ence fo# the p#osecution is not technicall7 a #eopenin& of thecase inas3uch as the latte# ha/ 7et to fo#3all7 #est its case. A 3otion to#eopen p#esupposes that eithe# o# both pa#ties ha$e fo#3all7 offe#e/ an/close/ thei# e$i/ence.F+-G If the Cou#t sanctions the a/3ission of a//itionale$i/ence afte# the case ha/ been sub3itte/ fo# #esolution but befo#e

u/&3ent %ith 3o#e #eason the#efo#e that %e shoul/ sustain the int#o/uctionof a//itional e$i/ence in the p#esent case because the p#osecution ha/ not7et conclu/e/ the p#esentation of its e$i/ence. The State is also entitle/ to/ue p#ocess in c#i3inal cases that is a fai# oppo#tunit7 to p#osecute an/con$ict. The Cou#t has al%a7s acco#/e/ this #i&ht to the p#osecution an/%he#e the #i&ht ha/ been /enie/ ha/ p#o3ptl7 annulle/ the offen/in& cou#taction.F+8G9u#the#3o#e the hapha6a#/ 3anne# b7 %hich P#osecuto# Salin/on& han/le/the case fo# the State %ill not pass unnotice/ b7 the Cou#t. It is the /ut7 of the public p#osecuto# to b#in& the c#i3inal p#ocee/in&s fo# the punish3ent of the &uilt7. Conco3itant %ith this is the /ut7 to pu#sue the p#osecution of ac#i3inal action an/ to #ep#esent the public inte#est.F2,G @ith these stan/a#/s

%e thus fin/ P#osecuto# Salin/on& #e3iss in the pe#fo#3ance of his

#esponsibilities. >e a$el7 abuse/ his /isc#etion b7 #estin& the case %ithouta//ucin& e$i/ence fo# the State an/ %ithout ensu#in& that petitione# ha/si&ne/ the !oint Stipulation of 9acts befo#e it %as sub3itte/ to theSan/i&anba7an. As a #esult the p#osecution %as /enie/ /ue p#ocess. In li&ht of the fo#e&oin& the San/i&anba7an %as the#efo#e co##ect in allo%in&the State to a//uce a//itional e$i/ence. The State shoul/ not be p#eu/ice/an/ /ep#i$e/ of its #i&ht to p#osecute cases si3pl7 because of the ineptitu/eo# nonchalance of the Special P#osecuto#.F2G A cont#a#7 #ulin& %oul/ #esultin a $oi/ p#ocee/in&s. In Me#ciales $. Cou#t of AppealsF2+G the Cou#t annulle/ the ac:uittal of theaccuse/ base/ on the /e3u##e# to e$i/ence file/ b7 the /efense. It %as hel/that the p#osecuto#s failu#e to p#esent sufficient e$i/ence to con$ict theaccuse/ an/ the in/iffe#ence /ispla7e/ b7 the t#ial cou#t in not #e:ui#in& thep#osecuto# to p#esent a//itional e$i/ence #esulte/ in the /enial of the States#i&ht to /ue p#ocess %a##antin& the #e$e#sal of the u/&3ent of ac:uittal onthe oun/ of absence of u#is/iction. Thus ... FTGhe public p#osecuto# ;ne% that he ha/ not p#esente/ sufficient e$i/enceto con$ict the accuse/.... he /elibe#atel7 faile/ to p#esent an a$ailable%itness an/ the#eb7 allo%e/ the cou#t to /ecla#e that the p#osecution has#este/ its case.... he %as #e3iss in his /ut7 to p#otect the inte#est of theoffen/e/ pa#ties.... Fan/G %as &uilt7 of blatant e##o# an/ abuse of /isc#etionthe#eb7 causin& p#eu/ice to the offen/e/ pa#t7 . B7 #efusin& to co3pl7 %ith the t#ial cou#ts o#/e# to p#esent e$i/ence thepublic p#osecuto# ossl7 $iolate/ the abo$e0:uote/ #ule. Mo#eo$e# thepublic p#osecuto# $iolate/ his boun/en /ut7 to p#otect the inte#est of theoffen/e/ pa#t7.... Afte# the t#ial cou#t /enie/ his 3otion to /ischa#&e Nua/a asa state %itness he shoul/ ha$e p#ocee/e/ to co3plete the e$i/ence of the

p#osecution b7 othe# 3eans. Instea/ he %illfull7 an/ /elibe#atel7 #efuse/ top#esent an a$ailable %itness i.e. the NBI A&ent %ho %as p#esent in cou#t onthat /ate an/ ti3e. The public p#osecuto# %as /ut70boun/ to e=haust alla$ailable p#oofs to establish the &uilt of the accuse/ an/ b#in& the3 to usticefo# thei# offense a&ainst the inu#e/ pa#t7. i;e%ise &uilt7 fo# se#ious nonfeasance %as the t#ial cou#t. Not%ithstan/in&its ;no%le/&e that the e$i/ence fo# the p#osecution %as insufficient tocon$ict especiall7 afte# the public p#osecuto# tenaciousl7 insiste/ on utili6in&Nua/a as state %itness the t#ial cou#t passi$el7 %atche/ as the publicp#osecuto# bun&le/ the case. The t#ial cou#t %as %ell a%a#e of the natu#e of the testi3onies of the se$en p#osecution %itnesses that ha$e so fa# been

p#esente/. 1i$en this ci#cu3stance the t#ial cou#t 3otu p#op#io shoul/ ha$e

12


13/49

calle/ a//itional %itnesses fo# the pu#pose of :uestionin& the3 hi3self ino#/e# to satisf7 his 3in/ %ith #efe#ence to pa#ticula# facts o# issues in$ol$e/in the case. Base/ on the fo#e&oin& it is e$i/ent that petitione# %as /ep#i$e/ of he# /a7 incou#t. In/ee/ it is not onl7 the State but 3o#e so the offen/e/ pa#t7 that isentitle/ to /ue p#ocess in c#i3inal cases. Inas3uch as the ac:uittal of theaccuse/ b7 the cou#t a :uo %as /one %ithout #e&a#/ to /ue p#ocess of la%the sa3e is null an/ $oi/. It is as if the#e %as no ac:uittal at all an/ thesa3e cannot constitute a clai3 fo# /ouble eopa#/7. In the sa3e $ein the #i&ht to spee/7 t#ial cannot be successfull7 in$o;e/%he#e to sustain the sa3e %oul/ #esult in a clea# /enial of /ue p#ocess to thep#osecution. @hile ustice is a/3iniste#e/ %ith /ispatch the essentialine/ient is o#/e#l7 e=pe/itious an/ not 3e#e spee/. It cannot be /efinitel7sai/ ho% lon& is too lon& in a s7ste3 %he#e ustice is suppose/ to be s%iftbut /elibe#ate. It is consistent %ith /ela7s an/ /epen/s upon ci#cu3stances.It secu#es #i&hts to the accuse/ but it /oes not p#eclu/e the #i&hts of public

ustice. Also it 3ust be bo#ne in 3in/ that the #i&hts &i$en to the accuse/ b7the Constitution an/ the Rules of Cou#t a#e shiel/s not %eapons hencecou#ts a#e to &i$e 3eanin& to that intent.F22G

As si&nificant as the #i&ht of an accuse/ to a spee/7 t#ial is the #i&ht of theState to p#osecute people %ho $iolate its penal la%s.F2*G The #i&ht to aspee/7 t#ial is /ee3e/ $iolate/ onl7 %hen the p#ocee/in& is atten/e/ b7$e=atious cap#icious an/ opp#essi$e /ela7s.F2


14/49

t#ansc#ibe notes) that he %as not %ai$in& it. As it is his silence %oul/ ha$e tobe inte#p#ete/ as a %ai$e# of such #i&ht.In Dela Pea $. San/i&anba7anF**G the Cou#t /enie/ a petition see;in& to:uash the Info#3ation hol/in& that the silence of the accuse/ a3ounte/ tolaches. In the sai/ case the in$esti&ato#7 p#ocess %as set in 3otion on

Au&ust * 88+ an/ the Info#3ation %as file/ on Ma7 4 88?. Afte# thea##ai&n3ent %as set so3eti3e in Dece3be# 888 the accuse/ file/ a3otion to :uash on Dece3be# + 888 base/ on the $iolation of his #i&ht to/ue p#ocess an/ p#o3pt /isposition of cases. In sustainin& theSan/i&anba7ans /enial of the 3otion to :uash the Cou#t #atiocinate/ that" Mo#eo$e# it is %o#th7 to note that it %as onl7 on + Dece3be# 888 afte# thecase %as set fo# a##ai&n3ent that petitione#s #aise/ the issue of the /ela7 inthe con/uct of the p#eli3ina#7 in$esti&ation. As state/ b7 the3 in thei# Motionto 5uashDis3iss FoGthe# than the counte#0affi/a$its Fthe7G /i/ nothin&. Alsoin thei# petition the7 a$e##e/" Asi/e f#o3 the 3otion fo# e=tension of ti3e tofile counte#0affi/a$its petitione#s in the p#esent case /i/ not file no# sen/ an7lette#0:ue#ies a//#esse/ to the Office of the O3bu/s3an fo# Min/anao %hichcon/ucte/ the p#eli3ina#7 in$esti&ation. The7 slept on thei# #i&ht a situationa3ountin& to laches. The 3atte# coul/ ha$e ta;en a /iffe#ent /i3ension if /u#in& all those fou# 7ea#s the7 sho%e/ si&ns of asse#tin& thei# #i&ht to a

spee/7 /isposition of thei# cases o# at least 3a/e so3e o$e#t acts li;e filin&a 3otion fo# ea#l7 #esolution to sho% that the7 %e#e not %ai$in& that #i&ht.Thei# silence 3a7 the#efo#e be inte#p#ete/ as a %ai$e# of such #i&ht. As aptl7state/ in Al$i6o the petitione# the#ein %as insensiti$e to the i3plications an/contin&encies of the p#oecte/ c#i3inal p#osecution pose/ a&ainst hi3 b7 notta;in& an7 step %hatsoe$e# to accele#ate the /isposition of the 3atte# %hichinaction con/uces to the pe#ception that the supe#$enin& /ela7 see3s toha$e been %ithout his obection Fan/G hence i3plie/l7 %ith his ac:uiescence. The fo#e&oin& /oct#ines %e#e #eite#ate/ in Be#nat $. San/i&anba7anF*is failu#e the#efo#e to ti3el7 :uestion the /ela7 inthe /isposition of the case a3ounte/ to an i3plie/ acceptance of such /ela7an/ a %ai$e# of the #i&ht to :uestion the sa3e. i;e an7 othe# #i&ht confe##e/b7 the Constitution o# statute e=cept %hen othe#%ise e=p#essl7 so p#o$i/e/the spee/7 t#ial #i&ht 3a7 be %ai$e/ %hen not positi$el7 asse#te/. Thus if the#e %as a /ela7 in the /isposition of the case petitione# is not enti#el7%ithout bla3e.F*?G Then too %hile petitione# is f#ee to ac;no%le/&e o# #eect the !ointStipulation of 9acts the t#ial cou#t cannot be sai/ to ha$e abuse/ its/isc#etion in o#/e#in& petitione# to si&n the sa3e consi/e#in& that sai/stipulation %as not 7et fo#3all7 offe#e/ b7 the p#osecution. At that sta&e sai//ocu3ent cannot 7et be consi/e#e/ officiall7 an e$i/ence fo# the p#osecution.

The #efusal the#efo#e of petitione# to affi= his si&natu#e in the sai/ stipulationo# in the P#e0t#ial O#/e# e3bo/7in& the sa3e is sufficient ustification fo# thet#ial cou#t to #ecall the latte# an/ in the e=e#cise of its soun/ /isc#etion setthe case fo# p#esentation of the p#osecutions e$i/ence. 9inall7 if petitione# /isaees %ith the /enial of his 3otion fo# lea$e to file/e3u##e# to e$i/ence his #e3e/7 is not to file a petition fo# ce#tio#a#i but top#ocee/ %ith the p#esentation of his e$i/ence an/ to appeal an7 a/$e#se/ecision that 3a7 be #en/e#e/ b7 the t#ial cou#t. The last sentence of Section+2 Rule 8 of the Rules of Cou#t p#o$i/es that the o#/e# /en7in& a 3otionfo# lea$e of cou#t to file /e3u##e# to e$i/ence o# the /e3u##e# itself shall notbe #e$ie%able b7 appeal o# ce#tio#a#i befo#e u/&3ent.

@>ERE9ORE the petition is DISMISSED. The !une * +,,* O#/e# of #espon/ent San/i&anba7an in C#i3inal Case No. +


15/49

ANAER #AA>AR, $etitioner, vs. T"E PEOPE O! T"E P"IIPPINE#5n% +.. BROT"ER# AR?ETING CORPORATION, res$on%ents.D E C I S I O NCAE!O SR. !."

This is a petition fo# #e$ie% on ce#tio#a#i un/e# Rule *< of the 88? Rules of C#i3inal P#oce/u#e of the O#/e#FG of the Re&ional T#ial Cou#t


16/49

@ithin the #e&le3enta#7 pe#io/ the#efo# the petitione# file/ a 3otion fo# #econsi/e#ation on the ci$il aspect of the /ecision %ith a plea that he beallo%e/ to p#esent e$i/ence pu#suant to Rule 22 of the Rules of Cou#t. On!anua#7 * +,,+ the cou#t issue/ an o#/e# /en7in& the 3otion.In he# petition at ba# the petitione# assails the o#/e#s of the t#ial cou#tclai3in& that afte# he# /e3u##e# to e$i/ence %as ante/ b7 the t#ial cou#tshe %as /enie/ /ue p#ocess as she %as not &i$en the oppo#tunit7 to a//ucee$i/ence to p#o$e that she %as not ci$ill7 liable to the p#i$ate #espon/ent.The petitione# in$o;es the applicabilit7 of Rule 22 of the Rules of Ci$ilP#oce/u#e in this case conten/in& that befo#e bein& a/u/&e/ liable to thep#i$ate offen/e/ pa#t7 she shoul/ ha$e been fi#st acco#/e/ the p#oce/u#al#elief ante/ in Rule 22.The Petition Is Me#ito#ious

Acco#/in& to Section Rule of the Re$ise/ Rules of C#i3inal P#oce/u#eSECTION . Institution of c#i3inal an/ ci$il actions. (a) @hen a c#i3inalaction is institute/ the ci$il action fo# the #eco$e#7 of ci$il liabilit7 a#isin& f#o3the offense cha#&e/ shall be /ee3e/ institute/ %ith the c#i3inal actionunless the offen/e/ pa#t7 %ai$es the ci$il action #ese#$es the #i&ht toinstitute it sepa#atel7 o# institutes the ci$il action p#io# to the c#i3inal action.

The #ese#$ation of the #i&ht to institute sepa#atel7 the ci$il action shall be3a/e befo#e the p#osecution sta#ts p#esentin& its e$i/ence an/ un/e# ci#cu3stances affo#/in& the offen/e/ pa#t7 a #easonable oppo#tunit7 to 3a;esuch #ese#$ation.

@hen the offen/e/ pa#t7 see;s to enfo#ce ci$il liabilit7 a&ainst the accuse/b7 %a7 of 3o#al no3inal te3pe#ate o# e=e3pla#7 /a3a&es %ithoutspecif7in& the a3ount the#eof in the co3plaint o# info#3ation the filin& feesthe#efo# shall constitute a fi#st lien on the u/&3ent a%a#/in& such /a3a&es.

@he#e the a3ount of /a3a&es othe# than actual is specifie/ in theco3plaint o# info#3ation the co##espon/in& filin& fees shall be pai/ b7 the

offen/e/ pa#t7 upon the filin& the#eof in cou#t.

E=cept as othe#%ise p#o$i/e/ in these Rules no filin& fees shall be #e:ui#e/fo# actual /a3a&es.

No counte#clai3 c#oss0clai3 o# thi#/0pa#t7 co3plaint 3a7 be file/ b7 theaccuse/ in the c#i3inal case but an7 cause of action %hich coul/ ha$e beenthe subect the#eof 3a7 be liti&ate/ in a sepa#ate ci$il action.

(b) The c#i3inal action fo# $iolation of Batas Pa3bansa Bl&. ++ shall be/ee3e/ to inclu/e the co##espon/in& ci$il action. No #ese#$ation to file suchci$il action sepa#atel7 shall be allo%e/.

Upon filin& of the afo#esai/ oint c#i3inal an/ ci$il actions the offen/e/ pa#t7shall pa7 in full the filin& fees base/ on the a3ount of the chec; in$ol$e/%hich shall be consi/e#e/ as the actual /a3a&es clai3e/. @he#e theco3plaint o# info#3ation also see;s to #eco$e# li:ui/ate/ 3o#al no3inalte3pe#ate o# e=e3pla#7 /a3a&es the offen/e/ pa#t7 shall pa7 a//itionalfilin& fees base/ on the a3ounts alle&e/ the#ein. If the a3ounts a#e not soalle&e/ but an7 of these /a3a&es a#e subse:uentl7 a%a#/e/ b7 the cou#tthe filin& fees base/ on the a3ount a%a#/e/ shall constitute a fi#st lien on the

u/&3ent.

@he#e the ci$il action has been file/ sepa#atel7 an/ t#ial the#eof has not 7etco33ence/ it 3a7 be consoli/ate/ %ith the c#i3inal action upon application%ith the cou#t t#7in& the latte# case. If the application is ante/ the t#ial of both actions shall p#ocee/ in acco#/ance %ith section + of this Rule&o$e#nin& consoli/ation of the ci$il an/ c#i3inal actions.

The last pa#aaph of Section + of the sai/ #ule p#o$i/es that the e=tinction of the penal action /oes not ca##7 %ith it the e=tinction of the ci$il action.Mo#eo$e# the ci$il action base/ on /elict shall be /ee3e/ e=tin&uishe/ if the#e is a fin/in& in a final u/&3ent in the c#i3inal action that the act o# o3ission f#o3 %hich the ci$il liabilit7 3a7 a#ise /i/ not e=ist.F?G

The c#i3inal action has a /ual pu#pose na3el7 the punish3ent of theoffen/e# an/ in/e3nit7 to the offen/e/ pa#t7. The /o3inant an/ p#i3o#/ialobecti$e of the c#i3inal action is the punish3ent of the offen/e#. The ci$ilaction is 3e#el7 inci/ental to an/ conse:uent to the con$iction of theaccuse/. The #eason fo# this is that c#i3inal actions a#e p#i3a#il7 inten/e/ to$in/icate an out#a&e a&ainst the so$e#ei&nt7 of the state an/ to i3pose theapp#op#iate penalt7 fo# the $in/ication of the /istu#bance to the social o#/e# cause/ b7 the offen/e#. On the othe# han/ the action bet%een the p#i$ateco3plainant an/ the accuse/ is inten/e/ solel7 to in/e3nif7 the fo#3e#.F-GUnless the offen/e/ pa#t7 %ai$es the ci$il action o# #ese#$es the #i&ht toinstitute it sepa#atel7 o# institutes the ci$il action p#io# to the c#i3inal actionthe#e a#e t%o actions in$ol$e/ in a c#i3inal case. The fi#st is the c#i3inal

action fo# the punish3ent of the offen/e#. The pa#ties a#e the People of thePhilippines as the plaintiff an/ the accuse/. In a c#i3inal action the p#i$ateco3plainant is 3e#el7 a %itness fo# the State on the c#i3inal aspect of theaction. The secon/ is the ci$il action a#isin& f#o3 the /elict. The p#i$ateco3plainant is the plaintiff an/ the accuse/ is the /efen/ant. The#e is a3e#&e# of the t#ial of the t%o cases to a$oi/ 3ultiplicit7 of suits.The :uantu3 of e$i/ence on the c#i3inal aspect of the case is p#oof be7on/#easonable /oubt %hile in the ci$il aspect of the action the :uantu3 of e$i/ence is p#epon/e#ance of e$i/ence.F8G Un/e# Section 2 Rule of the88? Rules of C#i3inal P#oce/u#e the sai/ #ules shall &o$e#n the p#oce/u#eto be obse#$e/ in action ci$il o# c#i3inal.The p#osecution p#esents its e$i/ence not onl7 to p#o$e the &uilt of the

accuse/ be7on/ #easonable /oubt but also to p#o$e the ci$il liabilit7 of the

16


17/49

accuse/ to the offen/e/ pa#t7. Afte# the p#osecution has #este/ its case theaccuse/ shall a//uce its e$i/ence not onl7 on the c#i3inal but also on theci$il aspect of the case. At the conclusion of the t#ial the cou#t shoul/ #en/e#

u/&3ent not onl7 on the c#i3inal aspect of the case but also on the ci$ilaspect the#eof"SEC. +. Contents of the u/&3ent. If the u/&3ent is of con$iction it shallstate () the le&al :ualification of the offense constitute/ b7 the actsco33itte/ b7 the accuse/ an/ the a&a$atin& o# 3iti&atin& ci#cu3stances%hich atten/e/ its co33ission (+) the pa#ticipation of the accuse/ in theoffense %hethe# as p#incipal acco3plice o# accesso#7 afte# the fact (2) thepenalt7 i3pose/ upon the accuse/ an/ (*) the ci$il liabilit7 o# /a3a&escause/ b7 his %#on&ful act o# o3ission to be #eco$e#e/ f#o3 the accuse/ b7the offen/e/ pa#t7 if the#e is an7 unless the enfo#ce3ent of the ci$il liabilit7b7 a sepa#ate ci$il action has been #ese#$e/ o# %ai$e/.

In case the u/&3ent is of ac:uittal it shall state %hethe# the e$i/ence of thep#osecution absolutel7 faile/ to p#o$e the &uilt of the accuse/ o# 3e#el7 faile/to p#o$e his &uilt be7on/ #easonable /oubt. In eithe# case the u/&3ent shall/ete#3ine if the act o# o3ission f#o3 %hich the ci$il liabilit7 3i&ht a#ise /i/not e=ist.F,G

The ac:uittal of the accuse/ /oes not p#e$ent a u/&3ent a&ainst hi3 on theci$il aspect of the case %he#e (a) the ac:uittal is base/ on #easonable /oubtas onl7 p#epon/e#ance of e$i/ence is #e:ui#e/ (b) %he#e the cou#t /ecla#e/that the liabilit7 of the accuse/ is onl7 ci$il (c) %he#e the ci$il liabilit7 of theaccuse/ /oes not a#ise f#o3 o# is not base/ upon the c#i3e of %hich theaccuse/ %as ac:uitte/. Mo#eo$e# the ci$il action base/ on the /elict ise=tin&uishe/ if the#e is a fin/in& in the final u/&3ent in the c#i3inal actionthat the act o# o3ission f#o3 %hich the ci$il liabilit7 3a7 a#ise /i/ not e=ist o# %he#e the accuse/ /i/ not co33it the acts o# o3ission i3pute/ to hi3.If the accuse/ is ac:uitte/ on #easonable /oubt but the cou#t #en/e#s

u/&3ent on the ci$il aspect of the c#i3inal case the p#osecution cannotappeal f#o3 the u/&3ent of ac:uittal as it %oul/ place the accuse/ in /ouble

eopa#/7. >o%e$e# the a&ie$e/ pa#t7 the offen/e/ pa#t7 o# the accuse/ o# both 3a7 appeal f#o3 the u/&3ent on the ci$il aspect of the case %ithin thepe#io/ the#efo#.

Afte# the p#osecution has #este/ its case the accuse/ has the option eithe# to (a) file a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence %ith o# %ithout lea$e of cou#t un/e# Section+2 Rule 8 of the Re$ise/ Rules of C#i3inal P#oce/u#e o# to (b) a//ucehis e$i/ence unless he %ai$es the sa3e. The afo#ecite/ #ule #ea/s"Sec. +2. De3u##e# to e$i/ence. Afte# the p#osecution #ests its case the cou#t3a7 /is3iss the action on the oun/ of insufficienc7 of e$i/ence () on itso%n initiati$e afte# &i$in& the p#osecution the oppo#tunit7 to be hea#/ o# (+)upon /e3u##e# to e$i/ence file/ b7 the accuse/ %ith o# %ithout lea$e of cou#t.

If the cou#t /enies the /e3u##e# to e$i/ence file/ %ith lea$e of cou#t theaccuse/ 3a7 a//uce e$i/ence in his /efense. @hen the /e3u##e# toe$i/ence is file/ %ithout lea$e of cou#t the accuse/ %ai$es his #i&ht top#esent e$i/ence an/ sub3its the case fo# u/&3ent on the basis of thee$i/ence fo# the p#osecution.

The 3otion fo# lea$e of cou#t to file /e3u##e# to e$i/ence shall specificall7state its oun/s an/ shall be file/ %ithin a non0e=ten/ible pe#io/ of fi$e (


18/49

hi3 to ha$e a spee/7 i3pa#tial an/ public t#ial to 3eet the %itnesses faceto face an/ to ha$e co3pulso#7 p#ocess to secu#e the atten/ance of %itnesses an/ the p#o/uction of e$i/ence in his behalf. >o%e$e# afte# a##ai&n3ent t#ial 3a7 p#ocee/ not%ithstan/in& the absence of the accuse/p#o$i/e/ that he has been /ul7 notifie/ an/ his failu#e to appea# isunustifiable.

!u#isp#u/ence ac;no%le/&es that /ue p#ocess in c#i3inal p#ocee/in&s inpa#ticula# #e:ui#e (a) that the cou#t o# t#ibunal t#7in& the case is p#ope#l7clothe/ %ith u/icial po%e# to hea# an/ /ete#3ine the 3atte# befo#e it (b) that

u#is/iction is la%full7 ac:ui#e/ b7 it o$e# the pe#son of the accuse/ (c) thatthe accuse/ is &i$en an oppo#tunit7 to be hea#/ an/ (/) that u/&3ent is#en/e#e/ onl7 upon la%ful hea#in&.

The abo$e constitutional an/ u#isp#u/entiall7 postulates b7 no% ele3enta#7an/ /eepl7 i3be//e/ in ou# o%n c#i3inal ustice s7ste3 a#e 3an/ato#7 an/in/ispensable. The p#inciples fin/ uni$e#sal acceptance an/ a#e te#sel7e=p#esse/ in the oft0:uote/ state3ent that p#oce/u#al /ue p#ocess cannotpossibl7 be 3et %ithout a la% %hich hea#s befo#e it con/e3ns %hichp#ocee/s upon in:ui#7 an/ #en/e#s u/&3ent onl7 afte# t#ial.F+G

This is so because %hen the accuse/ files a /e3u##e# to e$i/ence theaccuse/ has not 7et a//uce/ e$i/ence both on the c#i3inal an/ ci$il aspectsof the case. The onl7 e$i/ence on #eco#/ is the e$i/ence fo# the p#osecution.@hat the t#ial cou#t shoul/ /o is to issue an o#/e# o# pa#tial u/&3ent antin&the /e3u##e# to e$i/ence an/ ac:uittin& the accuse/ an/ set the case fo# continuation of t#ial fo# the petitione# to a//uce e$i/ence on the ci$il aspect of the case an/ fo# the p#i$ate co3plainant to a//uce e$i/ence b7 %a7 of #ebuttal afte# %hich the pa#ties 3a7 a//uce thei# su#0#ebuttal e$i/ence asp#o$i/e/ fo# in Section Rule 8 of the Re$ise/ Rules of C#i3inalP#oce/u#e"Sec. . O#/e# of t#ial. The t#ial shall p#ocee/ in the follo%in& o#/e#"

(a) The p#osecution shall p#esent e$i/ence to p#o$e the cha#&e an/ in thep#ope# case the ci$il liabilit7.

(b) The accuse/ 3a7 p#esent e$i/ence to p#o$e his /efense an/ /a3a&es if an7 a#isin& f#o3 the issuance of a p#o$isional #e3e/7 in the case.

(c) The p#osecution an/ the /efense 3a7 in that o#/e# p#esent #ebuttal an/su#0#ebuttal e$i/ence unless the cou#t in fu#the#ance of ustice pe#3its the3to p#esent a//itional e$i/ence bea#in& upon the 3ain issue.

(/) Upon a/3ission of the e$i/ence of the pa#ties the case shall be /ee3e/sub3itte/ fo# /ecision unless the cou#t /i#ects the3 to a#&ue o#all7 o# to

sub3it %#itten 3e3o#an/a.

(e) @hen the accuse/ a/3its the act o# o3ission cha#&e/ in the co3plaint o# info#3ation but inte#poses a la%ful /efense the o#/e# of t#ial 3a7 be3o/ifie/.

The#eafte# the cou#t shall #en/e# u/&3ent on the ci$il aspect of the case onthe basis of the e$i/ence of the p#osecution an/ the accuse/.In this case the petitione# %as cha#&e/ %ith estafa un/e# A#ticle 2o%e$e# the cou#t #en/e#e/

u/&3ent on the ci$il aspect of the case an/ o#/e#e/ the petitione# to pa7 fo# he# pu#chases f#o3 the p#i$ate co3plainant e$en befo#e the petitione# coul/a//uce e$i/ence the#eon. Patentl7 the#efo#e the petitione# %as /enie/ he# #i&ht to /ue p#ocess.IN I1>T O9 A T>E 9ORE1OIN1 the Petition is 1RANTED. The O#/e#s/ate/ No$e3be# 8 +,, an/ !anua#7 * +,,+ a#e SET ASIDE AND

NUI9IED. The Re&ional T#ial Cou#t of e&a6pi Cit7 B#anch o%e$e# to i3plicate a co0accuse/ as a co0p#incipalconspi#ac7 3ust be p#o$en be7on/ #easonable /oubt. In the absence of conspi#ac7 the #esponsibilit7 of the t%o accuse/ is in/i$i/ual not collecti$e.

The Case

18


19/49

Befo#e us is an appeal of the DecisionFG of the Re&ional T#ial Cou#t of PiliCa3a#ines Su# in C#i3inal Case No. P0++8? %hich con$icte/ No#lito Tan of 3u#/e# an/ !ose Tan of bein& an acco3plice in such c#i3e.

On !anua#7 2 88* an Info#3ationF+G %as file/ a&ainst the appellants theaccusato#7 po#tion of %hich #ea/s as follo%s"

That on o# about the 4th /a7 of Septe3be# 882 in Ba#an&a7 1atbo

Municipalit7 of Oca3po P#o$ince of Ca3a#ines Su# Philippines an/ %ithinthe u#is/iction of this >ono#able Cou#t the abo$e0na3e/ accuse/ %ithintent to ;ill %ith t#eache#7 an/ e$i/ent p#e3e/itation conspi#in&confe/e#atin& to&ethe# an/ 3utuall7 helpin& one anothe# /i/ then an/ the#e%ilfull7 unla%full7 an/ feloniousl7 attac; assault stone an/ stab %ith a/ea/l7 %eapon one Ma&/aleno Ru/7 Olos alias Mo/esto Olos the#eb7inflictin& upon the latte# 3o#tal %oun/s on the /iffe#ent pa#ts of his bo/7%hich cause/ his /eath to the /a3a&e an/ p#eu/ice of the hei#s of theoffen/e/ pa#t7 in such a3ount as 3a7 be p#o$en in cou#t.F2G

On Dece3be# * 88


20/49

=== === ===F8G

Ve#sion of the Defense

In thei# B#iefF,G Appellants No#lito Tan an/ !ose Tan clai3 self0/efense an//enial #especti$el7 alle&in& as follo%s"

B. E$i/ence fo# the Defense"

On Septe3be# 4 882 in B&7. 1atbo Oca3po Ca3a#ines Su# at about*",, ocloc; in the afte#noon !ose Tan %as then %atchin& a bas;etball &a3e%hile his b#othe# No#lito Tan %as pla7in& bas;etball. At about


21/49

the %itnesses %hile testif7in& on the stan/ its conclusions an/ fin/in&s onthei# c#e/ibilit7 a#e entitle/ to eat %ei&ht on appeal an/ shoul/ not bechan&e/ e=cept fo# st#on& an/ $ali/ #easons.F2G

Alle&e/ I##e&ula#ities

Appellants conten/ that the t#ial cou#t e##e/ in &i$in& c#e/ence to thetesti3onies of P#osecution @itnesses Ra3on Nueca an/ Ofelia Olosconsi/e#in& that the /efense %as not able to c#oss0e=a3ine Nueca

tho#ou&hl7. @ith #e&a#/ to Olos appellants clai3 that he# p#esentation as a#ebuttal %itness %as i##e&ula# an/ as such shoul/ not ha$e been allo%e/ b7the cou#t a :uo.

The#e is no 3e#it to appellants asse#tion of p#oce/u#al p#eu/ice. T#ueRa3on Nueca /i/ not #etu#n to cou#t to finish his c#oss0e=a3inationho%e$e# this /oes not 3ean that his testi3on7 shoul/ be e=pun&e/ asappellants insists. It 3ust be note/ that his failu#e to appea# befo#e the cou#t%as not the fault of p#osecution. Mo#e i3po#tant the /efense ha/ theoppo#tunit7 to c#oss0e=a3ine hi3 as in fact he %as actuall7 subecte/ toc#oss0e=a3ination b7 the appellants counsel Att7. C#ispo 5. Bo#a !#.F*G Thec#oss0e=a3ination touche/ on the 3ate#ial points elicite/ f#o3 Nueca /u#in&

his /i#ect e=a3ination his e7e%itness /esc#iption of No#l7 an/ !ose Tanspa#ticipation in the ;illin&.

Neithe# can the p#esentation of Ofelia Olos as a #ebuttal %itness be /ee3e/i##e&ula#. Consi/e#in& that the appellants clai3e/ self0/efense onl7 afte# thep#osecution ha/ #este/ its case the latte# afte# bein& allo%e/ b7 the t#ialcou#t e=e#cise/ its p#e#o&ati$e to p#esent Olos so that she coul/ testif7 thatthe attac; on he# husban/ %as su//en an/ une=pecte/. 9u#the#3o#e it is%ithin the soun/ /isc#etion of a t#ial u/&e to allo% a pa#t7 that has #este/ itscase to int#o/uce #ebuttal e$i/ence.Fe sa% FhisG b#othe#0in0la% Mo/esto Olos stabbe/ th#ice b7 No#lito Tanhittin& hi3 t%ice at the bac; an/ once in f#ont of the bo/7 (pp. + * tsn?02084) cont#a#7 to the testi3on7 of D#. 1on6ales %ho testifie/ that the $icti3suffe#e/ inu#ies at the left po#tion of the bac;si/e bo/7 (inte#costal post line)at the left f#ont si/e belo% the nipple an/ on his ab/o3en. (pp. + *

tsn -0*084).

+. The #eason %h7 both accuse/ ;ille/ his b#othe#0in0la% %as that the7 %e#eapp#ehen/e/ b7 the $icti3 in the house of 9lo#es pe# info#3ation &i$en tohi3 b7 sai/ $icti3 (p. + tsn ?02084) %hile in his s%o#n state3ent 3a#;e/E=h. he state/ that he F/i/G not ;no% of an7 3oti$e %h7 accuse/ No#litostabbe/ an/ !ose stone/ hi3.

2. No#lito hi/ an/ e3e#&e/ f#o3 the talahib ass an/ i33e/iatel7 stabbe/his b#othe#0in0la% (pp. 2 < *, tsn ?02084) %hile in e=hibit he state/

that %hile he %as %al;in& on the #oa/ &oin& to 1atbo he %as app#oache/ b7No#lito an/ !ose an/ then Mo/esto %as stabbe/ b7 No#lito.

=== === ===

@ith #espect to the $ital an/ 3ate#ial pointspa#ts of the testi3on7 of OfeliaOlos %hich li;e%ise #e:ui#e ca#eful consi/e#ation a#e as follo%s"

. That befo#e the stabbin& inci/ent she sa% No#lito su//enl7 e3e#&e/ f#o3the talahib ass an/ i33e/iatel7 stabbe/ he# husban/ 00 this is cont#a#7 tohe# state3ent &i$en /u#in& the p#eli3ina#7 in:ui#7 con/ucte/ b7 the p#esi/in&

u/&e of MTC Oca3po Ca3a#ines Su# %hich state3ent is pa#t of the #eco#/

of this case. In sai/ state3ent she sai/ that %hen she %as out of he# houseafte# coo;in& she sa% he# husban/ bein& stabbe/ b7 No#lito an/ befo#e he# husban/ %as stabbe/ he %as stan/in& on the #oa/ an/ about to pic; up astone %hen attac;e/ b7 both accuse/. She /i/ not 3ention an7 talahib assin sai/ state3ent.

+. That %hile No#lito %as stabbin& he# husban/ !ose shoute/ at his b#othe# to stop 0 These alle&ations of Ofelia a#e cont#a#7 to hu3an e=pe#ience fo# the si3ple #eason that if accuse/ !ose #eall7 shoute/ at his b#othe# to stopstabbin& Mo/esto Olos he %oul/ not th#o% stones at the latte#.

2. That he# house is si= (4) 3ete#s a%a7 f#o3 the #oa/ an/ in bet%een he#

house an/ the #oa/ the#e a#e i##i&ation canal #icefiel/ an/ a $acant lot (Pp.40? tsn 20,08?) This is cont#a#7 to the testi3on7 of he# b#othe#0in0la% asacco#/in& to hi3 the house of Ofelia is thi#t7 (2,) 3ete#s a%a7 f#o3 the#oa/ an/ bet%een the #oa/ an/ the house of Olos the#e a#e t%o (+)i##i&ation canals an/ a #icefiel/ in bet%een sai/ canals (P.2, tsn ?02084).Thus it is i3p#obable that the house of Ofelia is onl7 4 3ete#s a%a7 f#o3 the#oa/ an/ she coul/ not see the pe#son on the othe# si/e of the talahib assf#o3 he# house as the ass is hi&he# than the hei&ht of a pe#son an/ the/istance f#o3 the house is 2, 3ete#s to the #oa/ as testifie/ b7 Ra3onNueca (Pp. 2*024 tsn ?02084).

21


22/49

*. That he# husban/ %as t%ice stabbe/ at the bac; on the left si/e bac;shoul/e# (P. +*. Tsn 20,08?). This is Fcont#a#7G to the testi3on7 of D#. To3as1on6ales as al#ea/7 3ention in the fo#e&oin&.

Consi/e#in& the fo#e&oin& testi3on7 of Ofelia Olos it is in/ubitable that she%as tellin& lies %hen she testifie/ in cou#t an/ %as not an e7e0%itness to theinci/ent. Ta;in& into consi/e#ation both testi3onies of Ra3on Nueca %hosetesti3on7 on c#oss0e=a3ination %as not finishe/ fo# his failu#e to #etu#n tocou#t an/ of Ofelia Olos on #ebuttal sta&e %hose testi3on7 is i3p#ope# fo#

consi/e#ation fo# #eason al#ea/7 afo#estate/ %e conten/ that the t#ial cou#ta$el7 e##e/ in #el7in& solel7 an/ &i$in& full c#e/ence to the testi3onies of sai/ p#osecution %itnesses an/ in fin/in& that accuse/ No#lito Tant#eache#ousl7 ;ille/ Mo/esto Olos an/ fin/in& also that !ose FTGan helpe/ hisb#othe# in the fatal stabbin& of the $icti3.

These a#&u3ents /o not pe#sua/e. The p#osecution %itnesses clea#l7 place/the appellants at the scene of the c#i3e an/ establishe/ that No#l7 Tanstabbe/ Olos. These facts %e#e a/3itte/ b7 No#l7 Tan %ho clai3e/ self0/efense. T#ue the#e a#e so3e appa#ent 3ino# inconsistencies in thetesti3onies of Nueca an/ Olos but the7 /o not /et#act f#o3 the cla#it7 thecohesi$eness o# the consistenc7 of thei# testi3onies on ho% No#l7 Tan ;ille/

the $icti3. Nueca testifie/ thus"

5 No% %e#e 7ou able to see the pe#sons #esponsible fo# the stabbin& of Ru/7 OlosL=== === ===

A Kes si# the#e %e#e t%o (+) pe#sons.5 @e#e 7ou able to #eco&ni6e the3L

A Kes si#.5 Can 7ou tell the >ono#able Cou#t thei# na3esL

A Kes si# No#l7 Tan an/ !ose Tan.5 >o% is this No#l7 Tan #elate/ to the No#lito Tan i3plea/e/ in this case %hostabbe/ Ma&/alino Ru/7 OlosL

A The sa3e pe#son si#.5 An/ please tell the >ono#able Cou#t%hat /i/ No#l7 Tan /oL

A No#lito Tan stabbe/ Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos.5 @e#e 7ou able to see the inst#u3ent %hich %as use/ b7 No#l7 Tan instabbin& Ma&/alino Ru/7 OlosL

A Kes si# a ;in/ of ;nife %hich is ;no%n in ou# /ialect as taba; o# &atab.5 @ill 7ou please /esc#ibe to the >ono#able Cou#t the %eapon othe#%isecalle/ as &atab in 7ou# localit7L

A So3e%hat s3all ;nife %hich is about ei&ht (-) inches lon&.5 @as that ei&ht inches lon& inclu/in& the han/leL

A Kes si#.5 No% %as Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos hit b7 the th#usts of No#l7 TanL

A Kes si#.

5 In %hat pa#t of the bo/7 of Ma&/alino #u/7 Olos %as hit b7 No#l7 tanL A At the bac; si#.COURT5 @hich pa#t of the bac;L

A Uppe# po#tion of his bac; Kou# >ono#. At this unctu#e %itness is pointin&the uppe# #i&ht po#tion of his bac;.=== === ===9ISCA RAMOS5 B7 the %a7 %hat %as Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos /oin& in the #oa/ %hen he

%as actuall7 assaulte/ b7 No#l7 TanL A >e %as on his %a7 ho3e si#.5 No% in #elation to the $icti3 Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos %he#e %as No#l7 Tan%hen he stabbe/ OlosL

A >e %as on the left si/e of Ma&/alino Olos si#.5 An/ %he#e /i/ No#l7 Tan e3e#&e o# %he#e /i/ he co3e f#o3 befo#e hestabbe/ Ma&/alino OlosL

A >e ca3e f#o3 the talahib.COURT5 >o% 3an7 ti3es /i/ he stab the $icti3L

A Th#ee (2) ti3es 7ou# hono#.=== === ===

9ISCA RAMOS5 An/ %hat inu#7 sustaine/ b7 $icti3 Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos at his bac; F00G%as that the inu#7 #esultin& f#o3 his /eath o# %hich of the stabbin& blo%s3a/e b7 No#l7 Tan === FhGit hi3L

A The7 all hit hi3 si#.5 >o% about the stabbin& blo% fo# the secon/ ti3eL

A Still at the bac; si#.5 >o% about the thi#/ ti3eL

A >e %as hit on the ab/o3en.5 No% 7ou 3entione/ ea#lie# that No#l7 Tan e3e#&e/ f#o3 the ass7po#tion %ill 7ou please tell the >ono#able Cou#t ho% tall F%as theG ass7po#tion %he#e No#l7 Tan e3e#&e/L

A It is hi&he# than a pe#son si#.5 >o% fa# is that ass7 po#tion %he#e Ma&/alino Olos ca3e f#o3L

A !ust besi/e the #oa/ si#.5 @ill 7ou please tell the >ono#able Cou#t of 7ou# o%n ;no%le/&e o# obse#$ation %as Olos able to see No#l7 Tan befo#e the latte# e3e#&e/ f#o3the ass7 po#tionL

A >e coul/ not ha$e seen No#l7 Tan because Ma&/alino Olos al#ea/7passe/ %hen No#lito Tan e3e#&e/ f#o3 the ass7 po#tion of the fiel/.5 No% fo# ho% lon& ha/ ti3e elapse/ %hen No#l7 Tan e3e#&e/ f#o3 theass7 po#tion of the fiel/ an/ stabbe/ OlosL

A A#oun/ one () secon/ si#.5 @hen the $icti3 Olos %as stabbe/ b7 No#l7 Tan fo# the fi#st ti3e at his

bac; %hat /i/ Olos /o if an7L

22


23/49

A @hen he face/ No#l7 tan No#l7 Tan stabbe/ hi3 in his ab/o3enLCOURT5 So the secon/ stab %as also in the ab/o3en of the $icti3L

A No 7ou# hono# the t%o (+) stabs hit his bac; an/ the thi#/ stab hit hisab/o3en.=== === ===9ISCA RAMOS5 No% ho% about !ose Tan /o 7ou ;no% %he#e he %as at the ti3e hisb#othe# No#l7 Tan e3e#&e/ f#o3 the talahibL

A Kes si#.5 @he#e %as heL

A >e %as at the 3i//le of the #oa/.5 No% in #elation to %he#e Ma&/alino Ru/7 Olos %as %al;in& at the 3i//leof the #oa/ %he#e %as !ose Tan at that ti3eL

A In f#ont of Olos.5 >o% fa# %as !ose Tan at that ti3eL

A About fi$e (ono#.=== === ===

9ISCA RAMOS5 @hat if an7 /i/ !ose Tan /oL

A >e stone/ Olos.5 At %hat 3o3ent /i/ !ose Tan th#o% Fstones atG Ma&/alino Ru/7 OlosFLG

A Afte# his b#othe# No#l7 Tan stabbe/ Olos si#.5 An/ %as Olos hit b7 the stone of !ose TanL

A Kes si#.5 In %hat pa#t of his bo/7 %as he hit %as !ose TanL

A In his nec;.5 >o% 3an7 ti3es /i/ he stone Ma&/alino Ru/7 OlosL

A Onl7 one () si#.5 >o% about 7ou %hat /i/ 7ou /o %hile No#l7 Tan %as stabbin& the $icti3

Ma&/alino OlosL A I %as about to #un a%a7 to the3 in o#/e# to pacif7 the3 but %hen the t%o(+) b#othe#s sa% 3e the7 fle/.5 To%a#/s %hat /i#ection F/i/G the7 FfleeLG.

A To%a#/s the /i#ection of thei# uncles house.F4GThe abo$e0:uote/ testi3on7 ibes %ith that of Ofelia Olos as to ho% theinci/ent happene/F?G an/ %ith that of D#. 1on6ales as to the nu3be# of %oun/s sustaine/ b7 the $icti3.

The inconsistencies pointe/ out b7 the appellants #efe# to thei# alle&e/3oti$e fo# ;illin& the $icti3 the /istance of the %itnesses f#o3 the locusc#i3inis an/ the location of the %oun/s inflicte/. >o%e$e# 3oti$e is not

i3po#tant %hen the#e is no /oubt about the i/entit7 of the pe#pet#ato# of the

c#i3eF-G as in the p#esent case. T#ue the#e %as $a#iance in the %itnessestesti3onies as to thei# /istance f#o3 stabbin& inci/ent. >o%e$e# the s;etchp#esente/ in cou#t sho%e/ that the7 ha/ a clea# $ie% of the scene.F8G An/althou&h the7 coul/ not pinpoint p#ecise locations the7 %e#e able to &i$e theco##ect nu3be# of %oun/s sustaine/ b7 the $icti3. thei# pe#ception as to%he#e the $icti3 %as st#uc; %as li;e%ise co##ect.

In an7 case the inconsistencies cite/ b7 the appellants a#e not substantialenou&h to i3pai# the c#e/ibilit7 of these %itnesses. Rathe# such 3ino# lapses

3anifest t#uthfulness an/ can/o# an/ e#ase suspicion of a #ehea#se/testi3on7.F+,G

In all %e cannot fault the t#ial cou#t fo# uphol/in& the #ele$ant po#tions of thep#osecution %itnesses testi3onies.

Secon/ Issue"

Self0Defense

@hen the accuse/ in$o;e self0/efense the bu#/en of p#oof is shifte/ to the3to p#o$e that the ;illin& %as ustifie/ an/ that the7 incu##e/ no c#i3inal liabilit7

the#efo#. The7 3ust #el7 on the st#en&th of thei# o%n e$i/ence an/ not on the%ea;ness of that of the p#osecution fo# e$en if the latte# is %ea; it coul/ notbe /isbelie$e/ afte# thei# open a/3ission of #esponsibilit7 fo# the ;illin&.F+G

In the p#esent case it is incu3bent upon Appellant No#l7 Tan to p#o$e self0/efense. Thus he 3ust p#o$e that the#e %as unla%ful a&ession on the pa#tof the $icti3 that the 3eans e3plo7e/ to p#e$ent it %e#e #easonable an/that the#e %as lac; of sufficient p#o$ocation o his pa#t. >o%e$e# he faile/ to/ischa#&e this bu#/en.

T#ue he alle&es that it %as the $icti3 Ma&/alino Olos %ho %as thea&esso# %ho ha/ sta#te/ the f#acas"

5 @hen Mo/esto Olos 3et 7ou on the left si/e of the #oa/ %hat else /i/ he/oL

A @hen %e %e#e on the left si/e of the #oa/ Mo/esto Olos as;e/ 3e %h7 I%as the#e an/ then I tol/ hi3 that I %as a #esi/ent an/ then he tol/ 3e thathe %ill bu#7 3e ali$e an/ at the sa3e ti3e he th#ust his bla/e/ %eapon an/stabbe/ 3e.COURT5 Di/ he hit 7ouL

A I %as able to pa##7 the th#ust an/ Fhol/G his a#3 %ith the %eapon. @hen I%as able to hol/ his han/ %ith the bolo I %as also able to /#a% 37 o%nbla/e/ %eapon an/ I %as able to stab hi3.

23


24/49

5 9#o3 %he#e /i/ 7ou /#a% that %eapon %hich 7ou use/ in stabbin&Mo/esto OlosL

A I /#e% it f#o3 insi/e 37 boot.=== === ===F++GThe abo$e0:uote/ testi3on7 ho%e$e# sho%s so3e inhe#ent cont#a/ictions.If it %as the $icti3 %ho ha/ attac;e/ No#l7 Tan then %h7 /i/ the fo#3e# suffe# th#ee stab %oun/s an/ the latte# noneL i;e%ise the Cou#t fin/s itha#/ to belie$e that No#l7 Tan %as able to sub/ue the $icti3 %ith one han/an/ at the sa3e ti3e &et his %eapon f#o3 his boot. Clea#l7 then his self0

se#$in& alle&ation %oul/ not suffice. It pales in co3pa#ison %ith the positi$ean/ cate&o#ical /ecla#ation of the p#osecution %itnesses that the attac; onthe $icti3 %as su//en an unp#o$o;e/.

Thi#/ Issue"

C#i3e an/ Its Punish3ent

The t#ial cou#t co##ectl7 #ule/ that the ;illin& %as atten/e/ b7 t#eache#7hence the c#i3e %as 3u#/e#.

The essence of t#eache#7 is the su//en an/ une=pecte/ attac; %ithout the

sli&htest p#o$ocation on the pa#t of the pe#son attac;e/.F+2G T#eache#7 isp#esent %hen the offen/e# co33its an7 of the c#i3es a&ainst pe#sonse3plo7in& 3eans 3etho/s o# fo#3s in the e=ecution the#eof %hich ten//i#ectl7 an/ especiall7 to insu#e its e=ecution %ithout #is; a#isin& f#o3 the/efense %hich the offen/e/ pa#t7 3i&ht 3a;e.F+*G In the case at ba# theattac; on Ma&/alino Olos %as t#eache#ous because he %as cau&ht off &ua#/an/ %as the#efo#e unable to /efen/ hi3self as testifie/ to b7 the p#osecution%itnesses an/ as in/icate/ b7 the %oun/s inflicte/ on hi3.

Culpabilit7 of !ose Tan

@e aee %ith the cou#t a :uo that the p#osecution %as not able to establish

conspi#ac7 in the ;illin& of the $icti3 thus Appellant !ose Tan is &uilt7 onl7as an acco3plice. @o#th :uotin& is the t#ial cou#ts /is:uisition on the 3atte#"

>o%e$e# the e$i/ence of the p#osecution #e&a#/in& the pa#ticipation of theothe# accuse/ !ose Tan is not so satisfacto#7 speciall7 #e&a#/in& its theo#7of conspi#ac7. In fact acco#/in& to the %i/o% Ofelio Olos she e$en hea#/!ose Tan tellin& an/ plea/in& %ith his b#othe# to stop his attac; an/ stabbin&of the $icti3. the 3ost the#efo#e that sai/ accuse/ coul/ be liable fo# is3e#el7 that of an acco3plice %ho not bein& a p#incipal coope#ate/ in thee=ecution of the offense b7 p#e$ious an/ si3ultaneous acts that in this caseb7 his stonin& the $icti3 Mo/esto Olos an/ hittin& hi3 on the nec;. >o%e$e#the accuse/ !ose Tans act of stonin& %as not a /i#ect pa#ticipation no#

in/ispensable to the ;illin& of the $icti3. also as hel/ b7 the Sup#e3e cou#t

%hen /oubt e=ists %hethe# an accuse/ acte/ as p#incipal o# acco3plice thecou#t shoul/ fa$o# the lesse# o# 3il/e# i/entit7 (People $s. I#enea 1.R. No.***, Au&ust


25/49

EN BANC&G.R. No. 10)'01*0). !ebr5r 1/, 199/

3I# A. TAB3ENA, $etitioner, vs. "ONORABE #ANDIGANBAAN, 5n%T"E PEOPE O! T"E P"IIPPINE#, res$on%ents.&G.R. No. 10)'0/. !ebr5r 1/, 199/

ADO!O . PERATA, $etitioner, vs. "ON. #ANDIGANBAAN 7!irstDivision:, 5n% T"E PEOPE O! T"E P"IIPPINE#, re$resente% b teO!!ICE O! T"E #PECIA PRO#EC3TOR, res$on%ents.D E C I # I O N9RANCISCO !."

Th#ou&h thei# sepa#ate petitions fo# #e$ie%FG uis A. Tabuena an/ A/olfo M.Pe#alta (Tabuena an/ Pe#alta fo# sho#t) appeal the San/i&anba7an /ecision/ate/ Octobe# + 88,F+G as %ell as the Resolution /ate/ Dece3be# +,88F2G /en7in& #econsi/e#ation con$ictin& the3 of 3al$e#sation un/e#

A#ticle +? of the Re$ise/ Penal Co/e. Tabuena an/ Pe#alta %e#e foun/&uilt7 be7on/ #easonable /oubt of ha$in& 3al$e#se/ the total a3ount of Pono#able Cou#t accuse/ uis A. Tabuena an/ 1e#a#/o 1.Dabao both public office#s bein& then the 1ene#al Mana&e# an/ Assistant1ene#al Mana&e# #especti$el7 of the Manila Inte#national Ai#po#t Autho#it7(MIAA) an/ accountable fo# public fun/s belon&in& to the MIAA the7 bein&the onl7 ones autho#i6e/ to 3a;e %ith/#a%als a&ainst the cash accounts of MIAA pu#suant to its boa#/ #esolutions conspi#in& confe/e#atin& an/confabulatin& %ith each othe# /i/ then an/ the#e %ilfull7 unla%full7feloniousl7 an/ %ith intent to /ef#au/ the &o$e#n3ent ta;e an/3isapp#op#iate the a3ount of T@ENTK 9IVE MIION PESOS(P+


26/49

That on o# about the 4th /a7 of !anua#7 8-4 an/ fo# so3eti3esubse:uent the#eto in the Cit7 of Pasa7 Philippines an/ %ithin the

u#is/iction of this >ono#able Cou#t accuse/ uis A. Tabuena an/ 1e#a#/o 1.Dabao both public office#s bein& then the 1ene#al Mana&e# an/ Assistant1ene#al Mana&e# #especti$el7 of the Manila Inte#national Ai#po#t Autho#it7(MIAA) an/ accountable fo# public fun/s belon&in& to the MIAA the7 bein&the onl7 ones autho#i6e/ to 3a;e %ith/#a%als a&ainst the cash accounts of MIAA pu#suant to its boa#/ #esolutions conspi#in& confe/e#atin& an/

confabulatin& %ith each othe# /i/ then an/ the#e %ilfull7 unla%full7feloniousl7 an/ %ith intent to /ef#au/ the &o$e#n3ent ta;e an/3isapp#op#iate the a3ount of T@ENTK 9IVE MIION PESOS(P+


27/49

9 o # " The P#esi/ent

9 # o 3 " Ministe# Robe#to V. On&pin

D a t e " ? !anua#7 8-<

Subect " App#o$al of Supple3ental Cont#acts an/

Re:uest fo# Pa#tial Defe#3ent of Repa73ent of PNCCs A/$ances fo# MIA

De$elop3ent P#oect

Ma7 I #e:uest 7ou# app#o$al of the attache/ #eco33en/ations of Ministe# !esus S. >ipolito fo# ei&ht (-) supple3ental cont#acts pe#tainin& to the MIADe$elop3ent P#oect (MIADP) bet%een the Bu#eau of Ai# T#anspo#t (BAT)an/ Philippine National Const#uction Co#po#ation (PNCC) fo#3e#l7 CDCP asfollo%s"

. Supple3ental Cont#act No. +

Pac;a&e Cont#act No. +

P,44,,.8<

+. Supple3ental Cont#act No. 2


28/49

2,.? 3illion

Sub3itte/ b7 PNCC /i#ectl7 to PEC an/ cu##entl7 un/e# e$aluation

44.< 3illion

T o t a l

P88. 3illion

The#e has been no fun/in& allocation fo# an7 of the abo$e escalation clai3s/ue to bu/&eta#7 const#aints.

The MIA P#oect has been co3plete/ an/ ope#ational as fa# bac; as 8-+an/ 7et #esi/ual a3ounts /ue to PNCC ha$e not been pai/ #esultin& inun/ue bu#/en to PNCC /ue to a//itional cost of 3one7 to se#$ice itsobli&ations fo# this cont#act.

Documents

Crim Pro 5th Batch