G.R. No.

169641               September 10, 2009 As stated at the beginning hereof, the CA, in its decision of July 14,
2005, in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 000717, affirmed with modification the
judgment of conviction pronounced by the trial court. We quote the fallo
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee,
of the CA decision:
vs.
RICHARD O. SARCIA, Accused-Appellant.
WHEREFORE, the judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED. The
accused, Richard Sarcia y Olivera, is ordered to suffer the penalty of
DECISION
DEATH, and to pay the victim, [AAA], the amount of (1) ₱75,000.00 as
civil indemnity; (2) ₱50,000.00 as moral damages, and (3) ₱25,000.00
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.: as exemplary damages.

On automatic review is the decision1 dated July 14, 2005 of the Court Let the entire records of this case be elevated to the Supreme Court for
of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00717 which affirmed, with review, pursuant to A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC (Amendments to the Revised
modifications, an earlier decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Rules of Criminal Procedure to Govern Death Penalty Cases), which
Ligao City, Branch 13, in Criminal Case No. 4134, finding herein took effect on October 15, 2004.
accused-appellant Richard O. Sarcia alias "Nogi" guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of rape 3 committed against AAA,4 and
SO ORDERED.
sentenced him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and to pay
the amount of ₱50,000.00 as civil indemnity, ₱50,000.00 as moral
damages, and the cost of the suit. However, the CA modified the On September 30, 2005, the case was elevated to this Court for further
penalties imposed by the RTC by imposing the death penalty, review.14
increasing the award of civil indemnity to ₱75,000.00, and awarding
₱25,000.00 as exemplary damages, aside from the ₱50,000.00 for
In our Resolution15 of November 15, 2005, we required the parties to
moral damages.
simultaneously submit their respective supplemental briefs. Accused-
appellant filed his Supplemental Brief16 on April 7, 2006. Having failed
The crime of rape was allegedly committed sometime in 1996 against to submit one, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) was deemed to
AAA, a five (5) year old girl. After almost four (4) years, AAA’s father have waived the filing of its supplemental brief.
filed a complaint5 for acts of lasciviousness against herein accused-
appellant on July 7, 2000. Upon review of the evidence, the Office of
In his Brief filed before the CA, accused-appellant raised the following
the Provincial Prosecutor at Ligao, Albay upgraded the charge to
assignment of errors:
rape.6 The Information7 dated September 5, 2000 reads:

I
That sometime in 1996 at Barangay Doña Tomasa, Municipality of
Guinobatan, Province of Albay, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd and THE LOWER COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO
unchaste design, and by means of force, threats and intimidation, did THE TESTIMONY OF [AAA], [her cousin] and [her father].
then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual
intercourse with [AAA], who was then 6 years of age, against her will
II
and consent, to her damage and prejudice.

THE LOWER COURT GLARINGLY ERRED IN REJECTING THE

ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.
DEFENSE OF ALIBI INTERPOSED BY THE ACCUSED WHICH IS
MORE CREDIBLE.
At his arraignment on October 25, 2000, accused-appellant, with the
assistance of his counsel, entered a plea of not guilty. 8 Thereafter, trial
III
on the merits ensued.

THE LOWER COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING THE

The prosecution presented the oral testimonies of the victim AAA; her
ACCUSED RICHARD SARCIA.
minor cousin; her father; and Dr. Joana Manatlao, the Municipal Health
Officer of Guinobatan, Albay. The defense presented the accused-
appellant himself, who vehemently denied committing the crimes The evidence for the prosecution is summarized by the OSG in the
imputed to him and Manuel Casimiro, Clerk of Court II of the Municipal Appellee's Brief, as follows:
Trial Court at Guinobatan, Albay.
On December 16, 1996, five-year-old [AAA], together with her [cousin
On January 17, 2003, the trial court rendered its Decision 9 finding the and two other playmates], was playing in the yard of Saling Crisologo
accused-appellant guilty of the crime of rape and imposed the penalty near a mango tree.
mentioned above.
Suddenly, appellant appeared and invited [AAA] to go with him to the
The record of this case was forwarded to this Court in view of the backyard of Saling Crisologo’s house. She agreed. Unknown to
Notice of Appeal filed by the accused- appellant.10 appellant, [AAA’s cousin] followed them.

Accused-appellant filed his Appellant’s Brief11 on July 15, 2004, while Upon reaching the place, appellant removed [AAA’s] shorts and
the People, through the Office of the Solicitor General, filed its underwear. He also removed his trousers and brief. Thereafter, he
Appellee’s Brief12 on December 15, 2004. ordered [AAA] to lie down on her back. Then, he lay on top of her and
inserted his penis into [AAA’s] private organ. Appellant made an up-
and-down movement ("Nagdapadapa tabi"). [AAA] felt severe pain
Pursuant to our pronouncement in People v. Mateo,13 modifying the
inside her private part and said "aray." She also felt an intense pain
pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure
inside her stomach.
insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the RTC to this Court in
cases in which the penalty imposed by the trial court is death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, and the Resolution dated September 19, [AAA’s cousin], who positioned herself around five (5) meters away
1995 in "Internal Rules of the Supreme Court," the case was from them, witnessed appellant’s dastardly act. Horrified, [AAA’s
transferred, for appropriate action and disposition, to the CA where it cousin] instinctively rushed to the house of [AAA’s] mother, her aunt
was docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00717. Emily, and told the latter what she had seen. [AAA’s] mother answered
that they (referring to {AAA and her cousin} were still very young to be Albay. He was to learn about it from his sister, Marivic, on a Sunday
talking about such matters. afternoon sometime on July 20, 2000 when his sister visited him in jail.
He naturally got angry when he heard of this rape charge because he
did not do such thing and recalled telling his sister they can go to a
Meanwhile, after satisfying his lust, appellant stood up and ordered
doctor and have the child examine to prove he did not rape her.
[AAA] to put on her clothes. Appellant then left.
Subsequently, from his sister again he was to learn that the rape case
was ordered dismissed.
Perplexed, [AAA’s cousin] immediately returned to the backyard of
Saling Crisologo where she found [AAA] crying. Appellant, however,
On cross-examination, Richard admitted [AAA’s] mother, is also related
was gone. [AAA’s cousin] approached [AAA] and asked her what
to his father, [AAA mother’s] father, being a second cousin of his
appellant had done to her. When [AAA] did not answer, [her cousin] did
father. Richard is convinced it is not the lending of money by his father
not ask her any further question and just accompanied her home.
to the AAA’s family as the motive for the latter to file the rape case
against him but the instigation of Salvacion Bobier.
At home, [AAA] did not tell her mother what appellant had done to her
because she feared that her mother might slap her. Later, when her
Manuel A. Casimiro, Clerk of Court II of the Municipal Trial Court
mother washed her body, she felt a grating sensation in her private
(MTC), Guinobatan, Albay, testified on the records of Criminal Case
part. Thereafter, [AAA] called for [her cousin]. [AAA’s cousin] came to
No. 7078 filed in MTC Guinobatan, Albay against Richard Sarcia for
their house and told [AAA’s] mother again that appellant had earlier
Rape in relation to RA 7610 relative to the alleged withdrawal of said
made an up-and-down movement on top of [AAA]. [AAA’s mother],
rape case but the accused through counsel failed to formally offer the
however did not say anything. At that time, [AAA’s] father was working
marked exhibits relative to said case.18
in Manila.

Accused-appellant alleges that the trial court erred in convicting him,

Dr. Joana Manatloa is the Municipal Health Officer of Guinobatan,
as the prosecution was not able to prove his guilt beyond reasonable
Albay. She testified that: (1) it was the rural health officer, Dr.
doubt. He assailed the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, AAA,
Reantaso, who conducted a physical examination on [AAA]; (2) Dr.
her cousin and her father on the following grounds: (1) the testimonies
Reantaso prepared and signed a medico-legal certificate containing
of AAA and her cousin were inconsistent with each other; (2) the victim
the result of [AAA]’s examination; (3) Dr. Reantaso, however, had
was confused as to the date and time of the commission of the offense;
already resigned as rural health officer of Guinobatan, Albay; (4) as a
(3) there was a four-year delay in filing the criminal case, and the only
medical doctor, she can interpret, the findings in said medico-legal
reason why they filed the said case was "to help Salvacion Bobier get
certificate issued to [AAA]; (5) [AAA]’s medical findings are as follows:
a conviction of this same accused in a murder case filed by said
"negative for introital vulvar laceration nor scars, perforated hymen,
Salvacion Bobier for the death of her granddaughter Mae Christine
complete, pinkish vaginal mucosa, vaginal admits little finger with
Camu on May 7, 2000." Accused-appellant stressed that the same
resistance; (6) the finding "negative for introital bulvar laceration nor
Salvacion Bobier helped AAA’s father in filing the said case for rape.
scars" means, in layman’s language, that there was no showing of any
Accused-appellant also claimed that the prosecution failed to prove
scar or wound, and (7) there is a complete perforation of the hymen
that he employed force, threats or intimidation to achieve his end.
which means that it could have been subjected to a certain trauma or
Finally, accused-appellant harped on the finding in the medical
pressure such as strenuous exercise or the entry of an object like a
certificate issued by Dr. Reantaso and interpreted by Dr. Joana
medical instrument or penis.17
Manatlao, stating "negative for introital bulvar laceration nor scar which
means that there was no showing of any scar or wound."
On the other hand, the trial court summarized the version of the
defense as follows:
In his Appellee's Brief accused-appellant pointed out the
inconsistencies between AAA’s and her cousin’s testimonies as
Richard Sarcia, 24 years old, single, student and a resident of Doña follows: (1) the cousin testified that she played with AAA at the time of
Tomasa, Guinobatan, Albay denied he raped [AAA]. While he knows the incident, while AAA testified that she was doing nothing before
[AAA’s] parents, because sometimes they go to their house looking for accused-appellant invited her to the back of the house of a certain
his father to borrow money, he does not know [AAA] herself. His father Saling; (2) the cousin testified that when she saw accused-appellant
retired as a fireman from Crispa in 1991 while his mother worked as an doing the push-and-pull motion while on top of AAA, the latter shouted
agriculturist in the Municipality of Teresa, Antipolo, Rizal. As an in a loud voice contrary to AAA’s testimony that when accused-
agriculturist of the Department of Agriculture, his mother would bring appellant was inside her and started the up-and-down motion, she said
seedlings and attend seminars in Batangas and Baguio. They were "aray"; (3) when the cousin returned to AAA after telling the latter’s
residing in Cainta, Rizal when sometime in 1992 they transferred mother what accused-appellant had done to AAA, she found AAA
residence to Guinobatan, Albay. His father is from barangay crying. AAA however testified that, after putting on her clothes, she
Masarawag while his mother is from barangay Doña Tomasa both of invited the cousin to their house; and (4) the cousin testified that other
Guinobatan, Albay. After their transfer in Guinobatan, his mother children were playing at the time of the incident, but AAA testified that
continued to be an agriculturist while his father tended to his 1-hectare there were only four of them who were playing at that time.
coconut land. Richard testified he was between fourteen (14) and
fifteen (15) years old in 1992 when they transferred to Guinobatan.
As it is oft-repeated, inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses,
Between 1992 and 1994 he was out of school. But from 1994 to 1998
which refer only to minor details and collateral matters, do not affect
he took his high school at Masarawag High School. His daily routine
the veracity and weight of their testimonies where there is consistency
was at about 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon after school before
in relating the principal occurrence and the positive identification of the
proceeding home he would usually play basketball at the basketball
accused. Slight contradictions in fact even serve to strengthen the
court near the church in Doña Tomasa about 1 kilometer away from
credibility of the witnesses and prove that their testimonies are not
their house. When her mother suffered a stroke in 1999 he and his
rehearsed. Nor are such inconsistencies, and even improbabilities,
father took turns taking care of his mother. Richard denied molesting
unusual, for there is no person with perfect faculties or senses. 19 The
other girls ... and was most surprised when he was accused of raping
alleged inconsistencies in this case are too inconsequential to overturn
[AAA]. He knows Saling Crisologo and the latter’s place which is more
the findings of the court a quo. It is important that the two prosecution
than half kilometer to their house. Richard claimed Salvacion Bobier,
witnesses were one in saying that it was accused-appellant who
grandmother of Mae Christine Camu, whose death on May 7, 2000
sexually abused AAA. Their positive, candid and straightforward
was imputed to him and for which a case for Murder under Criminal
narrations of how AAA was sexually abused by accused-appellant
Case No. 4087 was filed against him with the docile cooperation of
evidently deserve full faith and credence. When the rape incident
[AAA’s] parents who are related to Salvacion, concocted and instigated
happened, AAA was only five (5) years old; and when she and her
[AAA’s] rape charge against him to make the case for Murder against
cousin testified, they were barely 9 and 11 years old, respectively. This
him stronger and life for him miserable. He was incarcerated on May
Court has had occasion to rule that the alleged inconsistencies in the
10, 2000 for the Murder charge and two (2) months later while he
testimonies of the witnesses can be explained by their age and their
already in detention, the rape case supposedly committed in 1996 was
inexperience with court proceedings, and that even the most candid of
filed against him in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Guinobatan,
witnesses commit mistakes and make confused and inconsistent Q But, did you not say, please correct me if I am wrong, you
statements. This is especially true of young witnesses, who could be got angry when your wife told you that something happened
overwhelmed by the atmosphere of the courtroom. Hence, there is to Hazel way back in 1996?
more reason to accord them ample space for inaccuracy.20
A Yes, sir.
Accused-appellant capitalizes on AAA’s inability to recall the exact date
when the incident in 1996 was committed. Failure to recall the exact
Q Yet, despite your anger you were telling us that you waited
date of the crime, however, is not an indication of false testimony, for
until June to file this case?
even discrepancies regarding exact dates of rapes are inconsequential
and immaterial and cannot discredit the credibility of the victim as a
witness.21 In People v. Purazo,22 We ruled: A After I heard about the incident, I and my wife had a talk
for which reason that during that time we had no money yet
to use in filing the case, so we waited. When we were able to
We have ruled, time and again that the date is not an essential element
save enough amounts, we filed the case.26
of the crime of rape, for the gravamen of the offense is carnal
knowledge of a woman. As such, the time or place of commission in
rape cases need not be accurately stated. As early as 1908, we Accused-appellant also contends that he could not be liable for rape
already held that where the time or place or any other fact alleged is because there is no proof that he employed force, threats or
not an essential element of the crime charged, conviction may be had intimidation in having carnal knowledge of AAA. Where the girl is below
on proof of the commission of the crime, even if it appears that the 12 years old, as in this case, the only subject of inquiry is whether
crime was not committed at the precise time or place alleged, or if the "carnal knowledge" took place. Proof of force, intimidation or consent is
proof fails to sustain the existence of some immaterial fact set out in unnecessary, since none of these is an element of statutory rape.
the complaint, provided it appears that the specific crime charged was There is a conclusive presumption of absence of free consent when
in fact committed prior to the date of the filing of the complaint or the rape victim is below the age of twelve.27
information within the period of the statute of limitations and at a place
within the jurisdiction of the court.
Accused-appellant harps on the medical report, particularly the
conclusion quoted as follows: "negative for introital bulvar laceration
Also in People v. Salalima,23 the Court held: nor scars, which means, in layman language, that there was no
showing of any scar or wound." The Court has consistently ruled that
the presence of lacerations in the victim’s sexual organ is not
Failure to specify the exact dates or time when the rapes occurred
necessary to prove the crime of rape and its absence does not negate
does not ipso facto make the information defective on its face. The
the fact of rape. A medical report is not indispensable in a prosecution
reason is obvious. The precise date or time when the victim was raped
for rape.28 What is important is that AAA’s testimony meets the test of
is not an element of the offense. The gravamen of the crime is the fact
credibility, and that is sufficient to convict the accused.
of carnal knowledge under any of the circumstances enumerated under
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. As long as it is alleged that the
offense was committed at any time as near to the actual date when the Accused-appellant’s defense of denial was properly rejected. Time and
offense was committed an information is sufficient. In previous cases, time again, we have ruled that denial like alibi is the weakest of all
we ruled that allegations that rapes were committed "before and until defenses, because it is easy to concoct and difficult to disprove.
October 15, 1994," "sometime in the year 1991 and the days Furthermore, it cannot prevail over the positive and unequivocal
thereafter," "sometime in November 1995 and some occasions prior identification of appellant by the offended party and other witnesses.
and/or subsequent thereto" and "on or about and sometime in the year Categorical and consistent positive identification, absent any showing
1988" constitute sufficient compliance with Section 11, Rule 110 of the of ill motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter,
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure. prevails over the appellants’ defense of denial and alibi. 29 The shallow
hypothesis put forward by accused-appellant that he was accused of
raping AAA due to the instigation of Salvacion Bobier hardly convinces
In this case, AAA’s declaration that the rape incident took place on
this Court. On this score, the trial court aptly reached the following
December 15, 1996 was explained by the trial court, and we quote:
conclusion:

The rape took place in 1996. As earlier noted by the Court the date
…True, Salvacion Bobier actively assisted AAA’s family file the instant
December 15, 1996 mentioned by [AAA] may have been arbitrarily
case against the accused, but the Court believes [AAA’s] parents
chosen by the latter due to the intense cross-examination she was
finally decided to file the rape case because after they have come to
subjected but the Court believes it could have been in any month and
realize after what happened to Mae Christine Camu that what
date in the year 1996 as in fact neither the information nor [AAA’s]
previously [AAA and her cousin] told her mother and which the latter
sworn statement mention the month and date but only the year.24
had continually ignored is after all true.

Likewise, witnesses’ credibility is not affected by the delay in the filing

AAA was barely 9 years of age when she testified. It has been stressed
of the case against accused-appellant. Neither does the delay bolster
often enough that the testimony of rape victims who are young and
accused-appellant’s claim that the only reason why this case was filed
immature deserve full credence. It is improbable for a girl of
against him was "to help Salvacion Bobier get a conviction of this same
complainant’s age to fabricate a charge so humiliating to herself and
accused-appellant in the case of murder filed by Salvacion Bobier for
her family had she not been truly subjected to the painful experience of
the death of her granddaughter Mae Christine Camu on May 7, 2000."
sexual abuse. At any rate, a girl of tender years, innocent and
guileless, cannot be expected to brazenly impute a crime so serious as
The rape victim’s delay or hesitation in reporting the crime does not rape to any man if it were not true. 30 Parents would not sacrifice their
destroy the truth of the charge nor is it an indication of deceit. It is own daughter, a child of tender years at that, and subject her to the
common for a rape victim to prefer silence for fear of her aggressor rigors and humiliation of public trial for rape, if they were not motivated
and the lack of courage to face the public stigma of having been by an honest desire to have their daughter’s transgressor punished
sexually abused. In People v. Coloma 25 we even considered an 8-year accordingly.31 Hence, the logical conclusion is that no such improper
delay in reporting the long history of rape by the victim’s father as motive exists and that her testimony is worthy of full faith and
understandable and not enough to render incredible the complaint of a credence.
13-year-old daughter. Thus, in the absence of other circumstances that
show that the charge was a mere concoction and impelled by some ill
The guilt of accused-appellant having been established beyond
motive, delay in the filing of the complainant is not sufficient to defeat
reasonable doubt, we discuss now the proper penalty to be imposed
the charge. Here, the failure of AAA’s parents to immediately file this
on him.
case was sufficiently justified by the complainant’s father in the latter’s
testimony, thus:
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act for the victim shall be in the increased amount of not less than
No. 7659,32 was the governing law at the time the accused-appellant ₱75,000.00. This is not only a reaction to the apathetic societal
committed the rape in question. Under the said law, the penalty of perception of the penal law, and the financial fluctuations over time, but
death shall be imposed when the victim of rape is a child below seven also an expression of the displeasure of the Court over the incidence of
years of age. In this case, as the age of AAA, who was five (5) years heinous crimes against chastity. (Emphasis Supplied)
old at the time the rape was committed, was alleged in the information
and proven during trial by the presentation of her birth certificate, which
The Court has had the occasion to rule that moral damages are
showed her date of birth as January 16, 1991, the death penalty should
likewise compensatory in nature. In San Andres v. Court of
be imposed.
Appeals,37 we held:

However, this Court finds ground for modifying the penalty imposed by
x x x Moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in
the CA. We cannot agree with the CA’s conclusion that the accused-
the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for
appellant cannot be deemed a minor at the time of the commission of
actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer.
the offense to entitle him to the privileged mitigating circumstance of
(Emphasis Supplied)
minority pursuant to Article 68(2)33 of the Revised Penal Code. When
accused appellant testified on March 14, 2002, he admitted that he
was 24 years old, which means that in 1996, he was 18 years of age. In another case, this Court also explained:
As found by the trial court, the rape incident could have taken place "in
any month and date in the year 1996." Since the prosecution was not
What we call moral damages are treated in American jurisprudence
able to prove the exact date and time when the rape was committed, it
as compensatory damages awarded for mental pain and suffering or
is not certain that the crime of rape was committed on or after he
mental anguish resulting from a wrong (25 C.J.S. 815).38 (Emphasis
reached 18 years of age in 1996. In assessing the attendance of the
Supplied)
mitigating circumstance of minority, all doubts should be resolved in
favor of the accused, it being more beneficial to the latter. In fact, in
several cases, this Court has appreciated this circumstance on the Thus, according to law and jurisprudence, civil indemnity is in the
basis of a lone declaration of the accused regarding his age.34 nature of actual and compensatory damages for the injury caused to
the offended party and that suffered by her family, and moral damages
are likewise compensatory in nature. The fact of minority of the
Under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code, when the offender is a
offender at the time of the commission of the offense has no bearing
minor under 18 years, the penalty next lower than that prescribed by
on the gravity and extent of injury caused to the victim and her family,
law shall be imposed, but always in the proper period. However, for
particularly considering the circumstances attending this case. Here,
purposes of determining the proper penalty because of the privileged
the accused-appelant could have been eighteen at the time of the
mitigating circumstance of minority, the penalty of death is still the
commission of the rape. He was accorded the benefit of the privileged
penalty to be reckoned with.35 Thus, the proper imposable penalty for
mitigating circumstance of minority because of a lack of proof
the accused-appellant is reclusion perpetua.
regarding his actual age and the date of the rape rather than a moral or
evidentiary certainty of his minority.
It is noted that the Court is granted discretion in awarding damages
provided in the Civil Code, in case a crime is committed. Specifically,
In any event, notwithstanding the presence of the privileged mitigating
Article 2204 of the Civil Code provides that "in crimes, the damages to
circumstance of minority, which warrants the lowering of the public
be adjudicated may be respectively increased or lessened according to
penalty by one degree, there is no justifiable ground to depart from the
the aggravating or mitigating circumstances." The issue now is whether
jurisprudential trend in the award of damages in the case of qualified
the award of damages should be reduced in view of the presence here
rape, considering the compensatory nature of the award of civil
of the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority of the accused at
indemnity and moral damages. This was the same stance this Court
the time of the commission of the offense.
took in People v. Candelario,39 a case decided on July 28, 1999, which
did not reduce the award of damages. At that time, the damages
A review of the nature and purpose of the damages imposed on the amounted to ₱75,000.00 for civil indemnity and ₱50,000.00 for moral
convicted offender is in order. Article 107 of the Revised Penal Code damages, even if the public penalty imposed on the accused was
defines the term "indemnification," which is included in the civil liability lowered by one degree, because of the presence of the privileged
prescribed by Article 104 of the same Code, as follows: mitigating circumstance of minority.

Art. 107. Indemnification-What is included. – Indemnification for The principal consideration for the award of damages, under the ruling
consequential damages shall include not only those caused the injured in People v. Salome40 and People v. Quiachon41 is the penalty provided
party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by by law or imposable for the offense because of its heinousness, not the
reason of the crime. public penalty actually imposed on the offender.

Relative to civil indemnity, People v. Victor36 ratiocinated as follows: Regarding the civil indemnity and moral damages, People v. Salome
explained the basis for increasing the amount of said civil damages as
follows:
The lower court, however, erred in categorizing the award of
₱50,000.00 to the offended party as being in the nature of moral
damages. We have heretofore explained in People v. Gementiza The Court, likewise, affirms the civil indemnity awarded by the Court of
that the indemnity authorized by our criminal law as civil liability ex Appeals to Sally in accordance with the ruling in People v. Sambrano
delicto for the offended party, in the amount authorized by the which states:
prevailing judicial policy and aside from other proven actual
damages, is itself equivalent to actual or compensatory damages in
"As to damages, we have held that if the rape is perpetrated with any
civil law. It is not to be considered as moral damages thereunder, the
of the attending qualifying circumstances that require the imposition of
latter being based on different jural foundations and assessed by the
the death penalty, the civil indemnity for the victim shall ₱75,000.00 …
court in the exercise of sound discretion.
Also, in rape cases, moral damages are awarded without the need
proof other than the fact of rape because it is assumed that the victim
One other point of concern has to be addressed. Indictments for rape has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award. However, the
continue unabated and the legislative response has been in the form of trial court’s award of ₱50,000.00 as moral damages should also be
higher penalties. The Court believes that, on like considerations, the increased to ₱75,000 pursuant to current jurisprudence on qualified
jurisprudential path on the civil aspect should follow the same direction. rape."
Hence, starting with the case at bar, if the crime of rape is committed
or effectively qualified by any of the circumstances under which the
death penalty is authorized by the present amended law, the indemnity
It should be noted that while the new law prohibits the imposition of the Sec. 68. Children Who Have Been Convicted and are Serving
death penalty, the penalty provided for by law for a heinous offense is Sentence. – Persons who have been convicted and are serving
still death and the offense is still heinous. Consequently, the civil sentence at the time of the effectivity of this Act, and who were below
indemnity for the victim is still ₱75,000.00. the age of eighteen (18) years at the time of the commission of the
offense for which they were convicted and are serving sentence, shall
likewise benefit from the retroactive application of this Act. x x x
People v. Quiachon also ratiocinates as follows:

The aforequoted provision allows the retroactive application of the Act

With respect to the award of damages, the appellate court, following
to those who have been convicted and are serving sentence at the
prevailing jurisprudence, correctly awarded the following amounts;
time of the effectivity of this said Act, and who were below the age of
₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity which is awarded if the crime is qualified
18 years at the time of the commission of the offense. With more
by circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty;
reason, the Act should apply to this case wherein the conviction by the
₱75,000.00.00 as moral damages because the victim is assumed to
lower court is still under review. Hence, it is necessary to examine
have suffered moral injuries, hence, entitling her to an award of moral
which provisions of R.A. No. 9344 shall apply to accused-appellant,
damages even without proof thereof, x x x
who was below 18 years old at the time of the commission of the
offense.
Even if the penalty of death is not to be imposed on the appellant
because of the prohibition in R.A. No. 9346, the civil indemnity of
Sec. 38 of R.A. No. 9344 provides for the automatic suspension of
₱75,000.00 is still proper because, following the ratiocination in People
sentence of a child in conflict with the law, even if he/she is already 18
v. Victor, the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of
years of age or more at the time he/she is found guilty of the offense
the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances
charged. It reads:
warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the
commission of the offense. The Court declared that the award of
₱75,000.00 shows "not only a reaction to the apathetic societal Sec. 38. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. – Once the child who is
perception of the penal law and the financial fluctuations over time but under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the
also the expression of the displeasure of the court of the incidence of offense is found guilty of the offense charged, the court shall determine
heinous crimes against chastity." and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the
offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of
conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under
The litmus test therefore, in the determination of the civil indemnity is
suspended sentence, without need of application: Provided, however,
the heinous character of the crime committed, which would have
That suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is
warranted the imposition of the death penalty, regardless of whether
already eighteen (18) of age or more at the time of the pronouncement
the penalty actually imposed is reduced to reclusion perpetua.
of his/her guilt.

As to the award of exemplary damages, Article 2229 of the Civil Code

Upon suspension of sentence and after considering the various
provides that exemplary or corrective damages are imposed in addition
circumstances of the child, the court shall impose the appropriate
to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
disposition measures as provided in the Supreme Court on Juvenile in
Exemplary damages are not recoverable as a matter of right. The
Conflict with the Law.
requirements of an award of exemplary damagees are: (1) they may be
imposed by way of example in addition to compensatory damages, and
only after the claimant’s right to them has been established; (2) they The above-quoted provision makes no distinction as to the nature of
cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending the offense committed by the child in conflict with the law, unlike P.D.
upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to No. 603 and A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC.48 The said P.D. and Supreme Court
the claimant; (3) the act must be accompanied by bad faith or done in a (SC) Rule provide that the benefit of suspended sentence would not
wanton, fraudulent, oppressive or malevolent manner.42 Since the apply to a child in conflict with the law if, among others, he/she has
compensatory damages, such as the civil indemnity and moral been convicted of an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua
damages, are increased when qualified rape is committed, the or life imprisonment. In construing Sec. 38 of R.A. No. 9344, the Court
exemplary damages should likewise be increased in accordance with is guided by the basic principle of statutory construction that when the
prevailing jurisprudence.43 law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish. 49 Since R.A. No.
9344 does not distinguish between a minor who has been convicted of
a capital offense and another who has been convicted of a lesser
In sum, the increased amount of ₱75,000.00 each as civil indemnity
offense, the Court should also not distinguish and should apply the
and moral damages should be maintained. It is also proper and
automatic suspension of sentence to a child in conflict with the law who
appropriate that the award of exemplary damages be likewise
has been found guilty of a heinous crime.
increased to the amount of ₱30,000.00 based on the latest
jurisprudence on the award of damages on qualified rape. Thus, the
CA correctly awarded ₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity. However the Moreover, the legislative intent, to apply to heinous crimes the
award of ₱50,000.00 as moral damages is increased to automatic suspension of sentence of a child in conflict with the law can
₱75,000.0044 and that of ₱25,000.00 as exemplary damages is be gleaned from the Senate deliberations 50 on Senate Bill No. 1402
likewise increased to ₱30,000.00.45 (Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2005), the
pertinent portion of which is quoted below:
Meanwhile, when accused-appellant was detained at the New Bilibid
Prison pending the outcome of his appeal before this Court, Republic If a mature minor, maybe 16 years old to below 18 years old is
Act (R.A.) No. 9344, the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 took charged, accused with, or may have committed a serious offense, and
effect on May 20, 2006. The RTC decision and CA decision were may have acted with discernment, then the child could be
promulgated on January 17, 2003 and July 14, 2005, respectively. The recommended by the Department of Social Welfare and Development
promulgation of the sentence of conviction of accused-appellant (DSWD), by the Local Council for the Protection of Children (LCPC), or
handed down by the RTC was not suspended as he was about 25 by my proposed Office of Juvenile Welfare and Restoration to go
years of age at that time, in accordance with Article 192 of Presidential through a judicial proceeding; but the welfare, best interests, and
Decree (P.D.) No. 603, The Child and Youth Welfare Code46 and restoration of the child should still be a primordial or primary
Section 32 of A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, the Rule on Juveniles in Conflict consideration. Even in heinous crimes, the intention should still be the
with the Law.47 Accused-appellant is now approximately 31 years of child’s restoration, rehabilitation and reintegration. xxx (Italics
age. He was previously detained at the Albay Provincial Jail at Legaspi supplied)1avvphi1
City and transferred to the New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa City on
October 13, 2003.
Nonetheless, while Sec. 38 of R.A. No. 9344 provides that suspension
of sentence can still be applied even if the child in conflict with the law
R.A. No. 9344 provides for its retroactive application as follows: is already eighteen (18) years of age or more at the time of the
pronouncement of his/her guilt, Sec. 40 of the same law limits the said
suspension of sentence until the said child reaches the maximum age
of 21, thus:

Sec. 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. – If the
court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon
the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in
conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the condition of
his/her disposition or rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with
the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment.

If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of
age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine
whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order
execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a
certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of
twenty-one (21) years. (emphasis ours)

To date, accused-appellant is about 31 years of age, and the judgment

of the RTC had been promulgated, even before the effectivity of R.A.
No. 9344. Thus, the application of Secs. 38 and 40 to the suspension
of sentence is now moot and academic.51 However, accused-appellant
shall be entitled to appropriate disposition under Sec. 51 of R.A. No.
9344, which provides for the confinement of convicted children as
follows:

Sec. 51. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and

Other Training Facilities. – A child in conflict with the law may, after
conviction and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution, in an
agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established,
maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in coordination
with the DSWD.

The civil liability resulting from the commission of the offense is not
affected by the appropriate disposition measures and shall be enforced
in accordance with law.52

WHEREFORE, the decision of the CA dated July 14, 2005 in CA-G.R.

CR-H.C. No. 00717 is hereby AFFIRMED with the following
MODIFICATIONS: (1) the penalty of death imposed on accused-
appellant is reduced to reclusion perpetua; 53 and (2) accused-appellant
is ordered to pay the victim the amount of ₱75,000.00 and ₱30,000.00
as moral damages and exemplary damages, respectively. The award
of civil indemnity in the amount of ₱75,000.00 is maintained. However,
the case shall be REMANDED to the court a quo for appropriate
disposition in accordance with Sec. 51 of R.A. 9344.

SO ORDERED.
 not tell them what happened to her because her mother might whip
her.

Sometime in May 1997, [AAA] was again sexually assaulted by

accused-appellant, which took place in the house of the latter. At that
time, she was on her way to see her mother at her workplace after she
had lunch. When she passed by the house of accused-appellant, the
ROBERT REMIENDO y SIBLAWAN, Petitioner, v. THE PEOPLE OF latter pulled her into his house and brought her into his room. She cried
THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. and shouted but accused-appellant told her to keep quiet. She
struggled but was helpless because accused-appellant was stronger.
They were alone in the room. Accused-appellant removed his clothes
DECISION and told her to remove her panty. Afraid, she removed her panty and
was made to lie on the bed. Accused-appellant inserted his penis into
NACHURA, J.: her vagina and she felt pain. She kept on moving but she could not
push away accused-appellant. She moved her shoulders and pushed
accused-appellant with both hands but he was stronger. Afterwards,
This is a petition1 for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of accused-appellant moved away and threatened to kill her if she told
Court assailing the Decision2 dated November 16, 2007 and the anyone what happened. She responded that she would not tell anyone.
Resolution3 dated October 3, 2008 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA- Later, she executed a sworn statement and identified accused-
G.R. CR No. 29316 entitled, "People of the Philippines v. Robert appellant as the person who raped her.
Remiendo y Siblawan."

Dr. Ronald R. Bandonill, Medico-Legal Officer of the National Bureau

The case arose from the filing of two criminal informations, both dated of Investigation (NBI)-Cordillera Administrative Region, physically
March 10, 2008, against petitioner Robert Remiendo y Siblawan examined the complainant on 2 January 1998. Said medico-legal
(Remiendo), that read' officer testified that [AAA] was thirteen (13) years old and a Grade III
pupil at Badiwan Tuba, Benguet at the time of the examination. She
Criminal Case No. 98-CR-2999 was four feet and eleven inches (4 11") tall, weighed 78 pounds, fairly
nourished, and fairly developed. She was conscious, coherent, and
cooperative. She was ambulatory and had no extra-genital injuries.
That in or about the month of March 1997, at Badiwan, Municipality of Upon examination of her genital area, he found old lacerations of the
Tuba, Benguet Province, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this hymen at 5:00 and 7:00 o'clock positions, which meant that her hymen
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there was altered by a hard rigid instrument. The lacerations were done
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of one more than three (3) months prior to the examination. To determine the
[AAA], a girl below 12 years of age. approximate size of the object that the hymenal opening could
accommodate, he inserted a test tube. The 2.5-centimeter diameter of
CONTRARY TO LAW.4 said tube was admitted with ease by the hymenal orifice. He noted that
the vaginal walls were lax and the ridges inside were smothered. The
complainant told him that accused-appellant raped her. He presented a
Criminal Case No. 98-CR-3000 written report of his findings.

That in or about the month of May 1997, at Badiwan, Municipality of On 12 July 1998, psychiatrist Dr. Elsie I. Caducoy conducted an
Tuba, Benguet Province, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this examination of the mental condition of the complainant. The latter was
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there also scheduled for psychological examination to be conducted by Elma
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of one Buadken. The result of the examination showed that [AAA] is suffering
[AAA], a girl below 12 years of age. from psychosis and organicity. She has a below average intelligence
quotient of 88, but not on the level of mental retardation. She can
CONTRARY TO LAW.5 perform simple tasks but needs guidance. As to her studies, she can
hardly comprehend what is being taught to her. Having psychosis
means that her brain is afflicted with a disease. Her medical history
Upon arraignment, Remiendo pled "not guilty" to both charges. After showed that she suffered head and body injuries brought about by
pretrial, a joint trial ensued before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), being sideswiped by a motor vehicle sometime in 1996. She was
Branch 62, La Trinidad, Benguet. Both the prosecution and the confined in the hospital for twelve (12) days. Said injuries substantially
defense presented their respective evidence, summarized by the CA in contributed to her present condition. Organicity, on the other hand,
its Decision, to wit: means that the complainant suffers from a cloud of memory, upward
rolling of the eyeballs, stiffening of the extremities, loss of
The prosecution presented the following version of facts: consciousness, and epileptic seizures. Her psychosis occurs after
seizure. She is not, however, insane. During a seizure, she does not
know what is going on, but afterwards she returns to her level of
The complainant [AAA] was born on 16 February 1986. At the time of consciousness. With regular medication, her seizures will be greatly
the commission of the offense, she was a minor below 12 years of age. minimized. During her interview, the complainant had a seizure and the
She knew accused-appellant Robert Remiendo as he was residing psychiatrist had to wait until her consciousness level returned. The
near the house where her family used to stay. Sometime in March complainant then revealed that accused-appellant and a certain
1997, she was sexually assaulted by accused-appellant inside said Reynoso Cera raped her. The psychiatrist opined that during the rape,
house. On that day, her parents and brother left for work after she did not have a seizure because if she had, she would not have
breakfast, and she was left alone in the house. Accused-appellant remembered what had happened. The fact that she was able to narrate
came in, pushed her into the room, and threatened to kill her if she what happened and who raped her suggested that she was on her
reported what happened. He undressed himself and the complainant. conscious level at such time. A written report of the foregoing findings
The latter was standing and refused to remove her panty but she was submitted in court.
obliged when accused-appellant insisted. Then he made her lie on the
bed and placed his penis in her vagina. The complainant struggled,
moved, and pushed accused-appellant. She felt pain when accused- The defense presented the following version of facts:
appellant inserted his penis into her vagina. She cried until accused-
appellant left, but she did not shout because accused-appellant warned Lea F. Chiwayan, thirteen (13) years old, testified that she was a
her not to, or else he would kick her. She put on her clothes after friend, playmate, and neighbor of the complainant. She testified that
accused-appellant left. Her parents arrived in the afternoon but she did she and [AAA] played together and talked about their "crushes." The
complainant told Lea Chiwayan that she had a crush on accused-
appellant. Sometime in April or May 1997, the complainant said that fourteen (14) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum
her brother had molested her, and that he and his father had sexual for each count of rape.
intercourse with her in their house in Poyopoy, Tuba. Sometime in
August 1997, the complainant confided that Reynoso Cera raped her in
He shall further indemnify the offended party [AAA] the sum of Fifty
his house. She told Lea Chiwayan that she did not feel anything
Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) by way of civil indemnity, the sum of
because she was used to having sexual intercourse with brother and
Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) by way of moral damages, and
father. One Saturday afternoon, Lea Chiwayan and the complainant
the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) by way of exemplary
were playing when they saw accused-appellant going to the basketball
damages.
court near the church. They followed him and watched a basketball
game. After the game, Lea Chiwayan went home with the others while
the complainant stayed behind. A few seconds after they left, the Pursuant to Administrative Circular No. 4-92-A of the Court
complainant ran after them and told them that something happened Administrator, the Provincial Jail Warden of Benguet Province is
between her and accused-appellant. She said that accused-appellant directed to immediately transfer the said accused, Robert Remiendo, to
pulled her towards the back of the church and had sexual intercourse the custody of the Bureau of Corrections, Muntinlupa City, Metro
with her. The complainant later took back what she said because she Manila after the expiration of fifteen (15) days from date of
was only joking. She then asked Lea Chiwayan not to tell the accused- promulgation unless otherwise ordered by this Court.
appellant. However, Lea Chiwayan told accused-appellant what the
complainant told them. Accused-appellant confronted the complainant.
Let a copy of this Judgment be furnished the Provincial Jail Warden of
He flicked a finger on her head, kicked and spanked her. He said,
Benguet Province for his information, guidance and compliance.
"what are you saying, why did I do that, if I like and I do it, I ll not do it
with you, you should be ashamed of yourself." He then borrowed the
vehicle of a certain Junie, started the engine, and stepped on the gas SO ORDERED.8
such that the fumes from the exhaust pipe were directed at the
complainant. Later, Lea Chiwayan learned that [AAA] filed a case
against accused-appellant. Aggrieved, Remiendo interposed his appeal before the CA. In its
assailed Decision, the CA affirmed the RTC, modifying only the civil
liability imposed upon Remiendo. The fallo of the CA Decision reads'
Dolores L. Daniel, Grade II teacher of [AAA] for the school year 1997-
1998, testified that the latter was unruly and a liar. The complainant
would pick fights and steal money from her classmates. However, the WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is
witness admitted that there was no written record in school that she DISMISSED. The Joint Judgment dated 27 October 2004 rendered by
reprimanded complainant for her behavior. She knew that the the Regional Trial Court, Branch 62, La Trinidad, Benguet, is
complainant had an accident before. AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION on the civil liability of accused-
appellant. He is ordered to pay the complainant, for each count of rape,
the sum of (a) P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, (b) P50,000.00 as moral
Victor Daniel, a jitney operator, testified that accused-appellant was damages, and (c) P25,000.00 as exemplary damages.
one of his drivers. He described accused-appellant as a hardworking
and industrious person. When he learned that Robert Remiendo was
accused of rape, he was outraged because he knew the daily activities SO ORDERED.9
of accused-appellant. The latter could not have done such act under
his strict supervision. Remiendo moved to reconsider the November 16, 2007 Decision, but
the CA denied the motion in its October 3, 2008 Resolution; hence, this
Accused-appellant testified that he knew the complainant, as she was petition alleging that'
a townmate of his mother. In September 1996, he and his parents were
then residing in Badiwan. When the complainant figured in an accident (a) THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN AFFIRMING
at that time, he was the one who informed her parents. The first time THE DECISION OF THE COURT A QUO CONVICTING PETITIONER
he saw the complainant was during the time when he was doing some OF STATUTORY RAPE DESPITE THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE TO
repairs on his jitney. He saw the complainant and her playmates go PROVE THE TRUE AND REAL AGE OF THE PRIVATE
inside the jitney. He told them to alight from the vehicle. Sometime in COMPLAINANT.
June 1997, he again saw the complainant and her sister playing inside
the jitney. He told them to alight as they were disturbing him. On the
day he was playing basketball at the church grounds in Badiwan, Lea (b) THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT GIVING
and Emma Chiwayan approached him and asked him if it was true that PETITIONER THE BENEFIT ACCORDED TO HIM BY REPUBLIC
he raped [AAA]. He asked where the latter was and went to see her. ACT 9344 KNOWN AS THE JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE
Out of anger, he borrowed the vehicle of Junie, started the engine, ACT OF 2006 INCREASING THE AGE OF CRIMINAL
directed the exhaust pipe at the complainant, and revved the engine so RESPONSIBILITY.10
the smoke would go straight to her. He slapped her and said "if I would
like someone, it would not be you because there are a lot of girls better Remiendo questions his conviction for statutory rape despite the
than you." During the Christmas party in Badiwan, he again saw the purported absence of competent proof that AAA was below 12 years
complainant roaming around the dance area. He told her to get out as old at the time of the alleged commission of the crimes. According to
she irritated the people dancing. The complainant said nothing and left him, the Certificate of Live Birth of AAA offered by the prosecution
the dance floor. Thereafter, he saw the complainant laughing and during its formal offer of exhibits was not admitted by the RTC in its
smiling. He learned that he was charged with two (2) counts of rape Order11 dated September 14, 1999 because "it was neither identified by
when he received a subpoena issued by the Office of the Provincial any witness, nor marked as exhibit during the trial though reserved for
Prosecutor in January 1998.6 ςηαñrοblεš νιr†υαl lαω lιbrαrÿ marking during the pretrial." He further posits that, on the basis of the
testimonies of the defense witnesses and the Elementary School
In its Joint Judgment7 dated October 27, 2004, the RTC found Permanent Record,12 AAA was more than 12 years old in March and
Remiendo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two (2) counts of May 1997.
statutory rape. The RTC disposed as follows:
Considering that AAA was more than 12 years of age, Remiendo then
WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the court finds ROBERT questions her credibility as a witness, claiming that she was smiling
REMIENDO y SIBLAWAN guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two during her testimony; and that her failure to flee from the situation,
counts of rape as charged in the Information docketed as Criminal even taking off her panties herself, belies her charges of statutory rape
Case No. 98-CR-2999 and in the Information docketed as Criminal against him.
Case No. 98-CR-3000, and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty
of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to We disagree.
As provided in Article 266-A (1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code, sexual the performance of a duty by a public officer (Civil Registrar). As such,
intercourse with a girl below 12 years old is statutory rape. Its two it is prima facie evidence of the fact of birth of a child,20 and it does not
elements are: (1) that the accused has carnal knowledge of a woman; need authentication. It can only be rebutted by clear and convincing
and (2) that the woman is below 12 years of age. Sexual congress with evidence to the contrary. Thus, despite the September 14, 1999 Order,
a girl under 12 years old is always rape.13 the RTC correctly appreciated the same in its Joint Judgment.

As regards the appreciation of the age of a rape victim, the Court, in Nevertheless, even assuming that the Certificate of Live Birth was not
People v. Pruna,14 laid down the following guidelines: appreciated by the RTC, the prosecution was able to establish that
AAA was below 12 years old during the two occasions of rape per the
guidelines laid down in Pruna. It is significant to note that both AAA
1. The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an
and BBB testified that AAA was born on February 21, 1986. This fact
original or certified true copy of the certificate of live birth of such party.
was neither denied nor objected to by the defense. The argument of
Remiendo that the prosecution admitted in the course of trial that
2. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar authentic AAA's birthday was February 21, 1984 cannot stand. As quoted by
documents such as baptismal certificate and school records which Remiendo in his petition'
show the date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove age.
Court:
3. If the certificate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have
been lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear
Anyway, it is stated in that document that the birth date of [AAA] was
and credible, of the victim's mother or a member of the family either by
February 21, 1983. Do you agree that that is an entry there?cralawred
affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify on matters respecting
pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party
pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules of Evidence shall be Pros. Suanding:
sufficient under the following circumstances:
Yes, your honor. We agree, your honor.21
A. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is sought
to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old;
This statement cannot qualify as a judicial admission on the birth date
of AAA. A judicial admission is an admission, verbal or written, made
b. If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of age and what is sought by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case and it
to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old; dispenses with proof with respect to the matter or fact admitted. It may
be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable
mistake or that no such admission was made. 22 In this case, what was
c. If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is
only admitted was that the entry of AAA's date of birth appearing in her
sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old.
school record is February 21, 1983. There was no such admission that
the said date was the correct birthday of AAA. And as between the
4. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, authentic document, or school record and the testimonies of AAA and her mother BBB, the
the testimony of the victim's mother or relatives concerning the victim's latter must prevail.
age, the complainant's testimony will suffice provided that it is
expressly and clearly admitted by the accused.
As to the credibility of AAA as a witness, jurisprudence instructs us that
the trial court's assessment deserves great weight, and is even
5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the conclusive and binding, if not tainted with arbitrariness or oversight of
offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial some fact or circumstance of weight and influence. The reason is
evidence regarding age shall not be taken against him. obvious. Having the full opportunity to observe directly the witnesses'
deportment and manner of testifying, the trial court is in a better
position than the appellate court to evaluate testimonial evidence
6. The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to the properly.23
age of the victim.15

Testimonies of rape victims who are young and immature deserve full
In this case, the prosecution offered in evidence a certified true copy of credence, inasmuch as no young woman, especially of tender age,
AAA's Certificate of Live Birth16 as part of the testimonies of AAA and would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her
her mother that AAA was born on February 21, 1986. It was reserved private parts, and thereafter pervert herself by being the subject of a
for marking as part of the exhibits for the prosecution, as shown in the public trial, if she was not motivated solely by the desire to obtain
Pretrial Order17 dated November 16, 1998. During the trial, in order to justice for the wrong committed against her. Youth and immaturity are
abbreviate the proceedings, the parties agreed to stipulate on the generally badges of truth. It is highly improbable that a girl of tender
testimony of AAA's mother, specifically on the following facts: years, one not yet exposed to the ways of the world, would impute to
any man a crime so serious as rape if what she claims is not true.24
1. That she is [BBB], the natural mother of [AAA], the victim in these
two (2) Criminal Cases Nos. 98-CR-2999 and 98-CR-3000; What is more, AAA's testimony of rape was corroborated by the NBI
medico-legal examination showing healed lacerations on her hymen.
2. That on January 5, 1998[,] she executed an affidavit-complaint for Hymenal lacerations, whether healed or fresh, are the best evidence of
and on behalf of her daughter which she subscribed before NBI agent forcible defloration. When the consistent and forthright testimony of a
Atty. Dave Alunan; andcralawlibrary rape victim is consistent with medical findings, there is sufficient basis
to warrant a conclusion that the essential requisites of carnal
knowledge have been established. When there is no evidence to show
3. That the subject matter of her sworn statement against Reynoso any improper motive on the part of the rape victim to testify falsely
Cera and Robert Remiendo is the alleged statutory rape against against the accused or to falsely implicate him in the commission of a
[AAA].18 crime, the logical conclusion is that the testimony is worthy of full faith
and credence.25 In this case, Remiendo failed to convince us to rule
And part of the affidavit-complaint of BBB is the statement that AAA otherwise.
was born on February 21, 1986.19
Remiendo also posits that he should benefit from the mandate of
A certificate of live birth is a public document that consists of entries Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9344, otherwise known as the Juvenile Justice
(regarding the facts of birth) in public records (Civil Registry) made in and Welfare Act of 2006.
The pertinent provision of R.A. No. 9344 reads' WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED, and the Decision dated
November 16, 2007 and the Resolution dated October 3, 2008 of the
Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED. No costs.
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. - A child fifteen (15)
years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall
be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected SO ORDERED.
to an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act.

A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age
shall be likewise exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an
intervention program, unless he/she acted with discernment, in which
case, such child shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in
accordance with this Act.

The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not

include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in
accordance with existing laws.26

Remiendo argues that the prosecution failed to establish that he acted

with discernment in the commission of the crimes charged. Thus, he
claims that he should be exempt from criminal liability.

We differ. Discernment is the mental capacity to understand the

difference between right and wrong. The prosecution is burdened to
prove that the accused acted with discernment by evidence of physical
appearance, attitude or deportment not only before and during the
commission of the act, but also after and during the trial. The
surrounding circumstances must demonstrate that the minor knew
what he was doing and that it was wrong. Such circumstance includes
the gruesome nature of the crime and the minor's cunning and
shrewdness.27

Culled from the records of this case, it is manifest that Remiendo acted
with discernment, being able to distinguish between right and wrong
and knowing fully well the consequences of his acts against AAA.
During the rape that occurred in March 1997, Remiendo waited for
AAA to be left alone at her house before he came, and, while doing his
dastardly act, threatened to kick her should she shout for help. In May
1997, Remiendo again ravished AAA in the room of his house when
the latter passed by and, thereafter, threatened to kill her if she told
anybody about what had just happened. Per his own testimony, he
knew that committing rape was wrong because he claimed to have
been enraged when he was asked by AAA's playmates if he indeed
raped AAA, to the point of slapping her and revving up the engine of a
jitney and directing the smoke from the exhaust pipe towards her.

Remiendo, being above 15 and under 18 years of age at the time of

the rape,28 and having acted with discernment, but having already
reached 21 years of age at the time of the imposition of his sentence
by the trial court, his claim for the benefits of R.A. No. 9344 is rendered
moot and academic in view of Section 4029 thereof which provides'

SEC. 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. - If the
court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon
the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in
conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of
his/her disposition or rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with
the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment.

If the child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of
age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine
whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order
execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a
certain period or until the child reaches the maximum age of twenty-
one (21) years.30

Remiendo was born on January 21, 1982. The Joint Judgment was
promulgated on October 27, 2004. Thus, at the time of the imposition
of his sentence, Remiendo was already 22 years old and could no
longer be considered a child for the purposes of the application of R.A.
No. 9344.
 Trial ensued with the prosecution and the defense presenting
witnesses to prove their respective versions of the story.

Evidence for the Prosecution

The testimonies of AAA,10 her father FFF,11 and rebuttal witness Julito

Apiki [Julito]12 may be summarized in the following manner:

FFF and appellant have been neighbors since they were born. FFF’s
house is along the road. That of appellant lies at the back
approximately 80 meters from FFF. To access the road, appellant has
to pass by FFF’s house, the frequency of which the latter describes to
be "every minute [and] every hour." Also, appellant often visits FFF
because they were close friends. He bore no grudge against appellant
prior to the incident.13

G.R. No. 182239               March 16, 2011 AAA likewise knows appellant well. She usually calls him kuya. She
sees him all the time – playing at the basketball court near her house,
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, fetching water, and passing by her house on his way to the road. She
vs. and appellant used to be friends until the incident.14
HERMIE M. JACINTO, Accused-Appellant.
At about past 6 o’clock in the evening of 28 January 2003, FFF sent his
DECISION eight-year-old daughter CCC to the store of Rudy Hatague to buy
cigarettes. AAA followed CCC. When CCC returned without AAA, FFF
was not alarmed. He thought she was watching television at the house
PEREZ, J.: of her aunt Rita Lingcay [Rita].15

Once again, we recite the time-honored principle that the defense of Julito went to the same store at around 6:20 in the evening to buy a
alibi cannot prevail over the victim’s positive identification of the bottle of Tanduay Rum.16 At the store, he saw appellant place AAA on
accused as the perpetrator of the crime.1 For it to prosper, the court his lap.17 He was wearing sleeveless shirt and a pair of short
must be convinced that there was physical impossibility on the part of pants.18 All of them left the store at the same time.19 Julito proceeded to
the accused to have been at the locus criminis at the time of the the house of Rita to watch television, while appellant, who held the
commission of the crime.2 hand of AAA, went towards the direction of the "lower area or place."20

Nevertheless, a child in conflict with the law, whose judgment of AAA recalled that appellant was wearing a chaleko (sando) and a pair
conviction has become final and executory only after his of short pants21 when he held her hand while on the road near the
disqualification from availing of the benefits of suspended sentence on store.22 They walked towards the rice field near the house of spouses
the ground that he/she has exceeded the age limit of twenty-one (21) Alejandro and Gloria Perocho [the Perochos]. 23 There he made her lie
years, shall still be entitled to the right to restoration, rehabilitation, and down on harrowed ground, removed her panty and boxed her on the
reintegration in accordance with Republic Act No. 9344, otherwise chest.24 Already half-naked from waist down,25 he mounted her, and,
known as "An Act Establishing a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice and while her legs were pushed apart, pushed his penis into her vagina and
Welfare System, Creating the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council made a push and pull movement. 26 She felt pain and
under the Department of Justice, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for cried.27 Afterwards, appellant left and proceeded to the
Other Purposes." Perochos.28 She, in turn, went straight home crying.29

Convicted for the rape of five-year-old AAA,3 appellant Hermie M. FFF heard AAA crying and calling his name from downstairs. 30 She
Jacinto seeks before this Court the reversal of the judgment of his was without slippers.31 He found her face greasy.32 There was mud on
conviction.4 her head and blood was oozing from the back of her head. 33 He
checked for any injury and found on her neck a contusion that was
The Facts already turning black.34 She had no underwear on and he saw white
substance and mud on her vagina.35 AAA told him that appellant
brought her from the store36 to the grassy area at the back of the house
In an Information dated 20 March 20035 filed with the Regional Trial of the Perochos;37 that he threw away her pair of slippers, removed her
Court and docketed as Criminal Case No. 1679-13-141[1], 6 appellant panty, choked her and boxed her breast;38 and that he proceeded
was accused of the crime of RAPE allegedly committed as follows: thereafter to the Perochos.39

That on or about the 28th day of January, 2003 at about 7:00 o’clock in True enough, FFF found appellant at the house of the Perochos.40 He
the evening more or less, at barangay xxx, municipality of xxx, asked the appellant what he did to AAA. 41 Appellant replied that he was
province of xxx and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, asked to buy rum at the store and that AAA followed him.42 FFF went
[Hermie M. Jacinto], with lewd design did then and there willfully, home to check on his daughter, 43 afterwhich, he went back to
unlawfully and feloniously had carnal knowledge with one AAA, a five- appellant, asked again,44 and boxed him.45
year old minor child.

Meanwhile, at around 7:45 in the evening of even date, Julito was still
CONTRARY TO LAW, with the qualifying/aggravating circumstance of watching television at the house of Rita. 46 AAA and her mother MMM
minority, the victim being only five years old.7 arrived.47 AAA was crying.48 Julito pitied her, embraced her, and asked
what happened to her, to which she replied that appellant raped
On 15 July 2003, appellant entered a plea of not guilty. 8 During pre- her.49 Julito left and found appellant at the Perochos. 50 Julito asked
trial,9 the defense admitted the existence of the following documents: appellant, "Bads, did you really rape the child, the daughter of [MMM]?"
(1) birth certificate of AAA, showing that she was born on 3 December but the latter ignored his question. 51 Appellant’s aunt, Gloria, told
1997; (2) police blotter entry on the rape incident; and (3) medical appellant that the policemen were coming to which the appellant
certificate, upon presentation of the original or upon identification responded, "Wait a minute because I will wash the dirt of my elbow
thereof by the physician. (sic) and my knees."52 Julito did found the elbows and knees of
appellant with dirt.53
On that same evening, FFF and AAA proceeded to the police station to Appellant’s aunt, Gloria, the lady of the house, confirmed that he was
have the incident blottered.54 FFF also had AAA undergo a physical in her house attending the birthday party; and that appellant went out
check up at the municipal health center. 55 Dr. Bernardita M. Gaspar, between 6 and 7 in the evening to buy a bottle of Tanduay from the
M.D., Rural Health Physician, issued a medical certificate 56 dated 29 store. She recalled that appellant was back around five (5) minutes
January 2003. It reads: later. She also observed that appellant’s white shorts and white
sleeveless shirt were clean.69
Injuries seen are as follows:
At 6:30 in the evening, 70 Luzvilla, who was also at the party, saw
appellant at the kitchen having a drink with his uncle Alejandro and the
1. Multiple abrasions with erythema along the neck area.
rest of the visitors.71 She went out to relieve herself at the side of the
tree beside the road next to the house of the Perochos. 72 From where
2. Petechial hemorrhages on both per-orbital areas. she was, she saw Julito, who was wearing black short pants and black
T-shirt, carry AAA.73 AAA’s face was covered and she was
wiggling.74 This did not alarm her because she thought it was just a
3. Hematoma over the left upper arm, lateral area game.75 Meanwhile, appellant was still in the kitchen when she
returned.76 Around three (3) minutes later, Luzvilla saw Julito, now in a
4. Hematoma over the upper anterior chest wall, white T-shirt,77 running towards the house of Rita.78 AAA was slowly
midclavicular line following behind.79 Luzvilla followed them.80 Just outside the house,
Julito embraced AAA and asked what the appellant did to her. 81 The
child did not answer.82
5. Abrasion over the posterior trunk, paravertebral area

Luzvilla also followed FFF to the Perochos. She witnessed the

6. Genital and peri-anal area soiled with debris and whitish punching incident and testified that appellant was twice boxed by FFF.
mucoid-like material According to her, FFF tapped the left shoulder of the appellant, boxed
him, and left. FFF came in the second time and again boxed appellant.
7. Introitus is erythematous with minimal bleeding This time, he had a bolo pointed at appellant. Appellant’s uncle
Alejandro, a barangay councilor, and another Civilian Voluntary
Organization (CVO) member admonished FFF.83
8. Hymenal lacerations at the 5 o’clock and 9 o’clock position

On sur-rebuttal, Antonia testified that, at 7 o’clock in the evening, she

Impression was watching the television along with other people at the house of
Rita. Around 7:10, Julito, who was wearing only a pair of black short
MULTIPLE SOFT TISSUE INJURIES pants without a shirt on, entered the house drunk. He paced back and
forth. After 10 minutes, AAA came in crying. Julito tightly embraced
AAA and asked her what happened. AAA did not answer. Upon
HYMENAL LACERATIONS Antonia’s advice, Julito released her and went out of the house.84

Upon the recommendation of Dr. Gaspar,57 AAA submitted herself to Appellant further testified that at past 7 o’clock in the evening, FFF
another examination at the provincial hospital on the following day. Dr. arrived, pointed a finger at him, brandished a bolo, and accused him of
Christine Ruth B. Micabalo, Medical Officer III of the provincial hospital, molesting AAA. FFF left but returned at around 8 o’clock in the
attended to her and issued a medico-legal certificate dated 29 January evening. This time, he boxed appellant and asked again why he
2003,58 the pertinent portion of which reads: molested his daughter.85

P.E. = Findings is consistent with Dr. Bernardita M. Gaspar findings On 26 March 2004, the Regional Trial Court rendered its decision, 86 the
except No. 6 and 7 there is no bleeding in this time of examination. dispositive portion of which reads:
(sic)59

WHEREFORE, finding accused Hermie M. Jacinto guilty beyond

Evidence for the Defense reasonable doubt of rape committed upon a 5-year old girl, the court
sentences him to death and orders him to pay [AAA] P75,000.000 as
Interposing the defense of alibi, appellant gave a different version of rape indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages. With costs87
the story. To corroborate his testimony, Luzvilla Balucan [Luzvilla] and
his aunt Gloria took the witness stand to affirm that he was at the The defense moved to reopen trial for reception of newly discovered
Perochos at the time of the commission of the crime. 60 Luzvilla even evidence stating that appellant was apparently born on 1 March 1985
went further to state that she actually saw Julito, not appellant, pick up and that he was only seventeen (17) years old when the crime was
AAA on the road.61 In addition, Antonia Perocho [Antonia], sister-in-law committed on 28 January 2003.88 The trial court appreciated the
of appellant’s aunt, Gloria,62 testified on the behavior of Julito after the evidence and reduced the penalty from death to reclusion
rape incident was revealed.63 perpetua.89 Thus:

Appellant claimed that he lives with his aunt, not with his parents WHEREFORE, the judgment of the court imposing the death penalty
whose house stands at the back of FFF’s house. 64 He denied that there upon the accused is amended in order to consider the privileged
was a need to pass by the house of FFF in order to access the road or mitigating circumstance of minority. The penalty impos[a]ble upon the
to fetch water.65 He, however, admitted that he occasionally worked for accused, therefore[,] is reduced to reclusion perpetua. xxx
FFF,66 and whenever he was asked to buy something from the store,
AAA always approached him.67
Appealed to this Court, the case was transferred to the Court of
Appeals for its disposition in view of the ruling in People v. Mateo and
At about 8 o’clock in the morning of 28 January 2003, appellant went to the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court allowing an intermediate
the Perochos to attend a birthday party. At 6:08 in the evening, while review by the Court of Appeals of cases where the penalty imposed is
the visitors, including appellant and his uncle Alejandro Perocho death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.90
[Alejandro], were gathered together in a drinking session, appellant’s
uncle sent him to the store to buy Tanduay Rum. Since the store is
only about 20 meters from the house, he was able to return after three On 29 August 2007, the Court of Appeals AFFIRMED the decision of
(3) minutes. He was certain of the time because he had a watch .68 the trial court with the following MODIFICATIONS:
xxx that Hermie M. Jacinto should suffer the Indeterminate penalty of A He mounted me.
from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years
of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) and four (4) months
Q When Hermie mounted you, was he facing you?
of reclusion temporal, as maximum. Appellant Hermie M. Jacinto is
ordered to indemnify the victim in the sum of P75,000.00 as civil
indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P25,000.00 as A Yes.
exemplary damages and to pay the costs.91
Q When he mounted you what did he do, did he move?
On 19 November 2007, the Court of Appeals gave due course to the
appellant’s Notice of Appeal.92 This Court required the parties to
A He moved his ass, he made a push and pull movement.
simultaneously file their respective supplemental briefs.93 Both parties
manifested that they have exhaustively discussed their positions in
their respective briefs and would no longer file any supplement.94 Q When he made a push and pull movement, how were your
legs positioned?
Before the Court of Appeals, appellant argued that "THE COURT A
QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING HEREIN ACCUSED- A They were apart.
APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF
RAPE"95 by invoking the principle that "if the inculpatory facts and
circumstances are capable of two or more reasonable explanations, Q Who pushed them apart?
one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the
other with his guilt, then the evidence does not pass the test of moral A Hermie.
certainty and will not suffice to support a conviction."96
Q Did Hermie push anything at you?
Our Ruling
A Yes.
We sustain the judgment of conviction.
Q What was that?
In the determination of the innocence or guilt of a person accused of
rape, we consider the three well-entrenched principles:
A His penis.

(1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to

prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; Q Where did he push his penis?
(2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two
persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be A To my vagina.
scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the
prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed
to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.97 Q Was it painful?

Necessarily, the credible, natural, and convincing testimony of the A Yes.

victim may be sufficient to convict the accused. 98 More so, when the
testimony is supported by the medico-legal findings of the examining Q What was painful?
physician.99

A My vagina.
Further, the defense of alibi cannot prevail over the victim’s positive
identification of the perpetrator of the crime,100 except when it is
established that it was physically impossible for the accused to have Q Did you cry?
been at the locus criminis at the time of the commission of the crime.101
A Yes.103
I
The straightforward and consistent answers to the questions, which
A man commits rape by having carnal knowledge of a child under were phrased and re-phrased in order to test that AAA well understood
twelve (12) years of age even in the absence of any of the following the information elicited from her, said it all – she had been raped.
circumstances: (a) through force, threat or intimidation; (b) when the When a woman, more so a minor, says so, she says in effect all that is
offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or (c) essential to show that rape was committed. 104 Significantly, youth and
by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority.102 immaturity are normally badges of truth and honesty.105

That the crime of rape has been committed is certain. The vivid Further, the medical findings and the testimony of Dr.
narration of the acts culminating in the insertion of appellant’s organ Micabalo106 revealed that the hymenal lacerations at 5 o’clock and 9
into the vagina of five-year-old AAA and the medical findings of the o’clock positions could have been caused by the penetration of an
physicians sufficiently proved such fact. object; that the redness of the introitus could have been "the result of
the repeated battering of the object;" and that such object could have
been an erect male organ.107
AAA testified:

The credible testimony of AAA corroborated by the physician’s finding

PROS. OMANDAM: of penetration conclusively established the essential requisite of carnal
knowledge.108
xxxx
II
Q You said Hermie laid you on the ground, removed your
panty and boxed you, what else did he do to you? The real identity of the assailant and the whereabouts of the appellant
at the time of the commission of the crime are now in dispute.
The defense would want us to believe that it was Julito who defiled shirt on. This belied Luzvilla’s claim that Julito wore a white shirt on his
AAA, and that appellant was elsewhere when the crime was way to the house of Rita. In addition, while both the prosecution, as
committed.109 testified to by AAA and Julito, and the defense, as testified to by Gloria,
were consistent in saying that appellant wore a sleeveless shirt,
Luzvilla’s recollection differ in that Julito wore a T-shirt (colored black
We should not, however, overlook the fact that a victim of rape could
and later changed to white), and, thus, a short-sleeved shirt.
readily identify her assailant, especially when he is not a stranger to
her, considering that she could have a good look at him during the
commission of the crime.110 AAA had known appellant all her life. Also, contrary to Luzvilla’s story that she saw AAA walking towards
Moreover, appellant and AAA even walked together from the road near Rita’s house three (3) minutes after she returned to the Perochos at
the store to the situs criminus111 that it would be impossible for the child 6:38 in the evening, Antonia recalled that AAA arrived at the house of
not to recognize the man who held her hand and led her all the way to Rita at 7:30. In this respect, we find the trial court’s appreciation in
the rice field. order. Thus:

We see no reason to disturb the findings of the trial court on the xxx. The child declared that after being raped, she went straight home,
unwavering testimony of AAA. crying, to tell her father that Hermie had raped her. She did not first
drop into the house of Lita Lingkay to cry among strangers who were
watching TV, as Luzvilla Balucan would have the court believe. When
The certainty of the child, unusually intelligent for one so young, that it
the child was seen at the house of Lita Lingkay by Julito Apiki and
was accused, whom she called "kuya" and who used to play basketball
Luzvilla Balucan, it was only later, after she had been brought there by
and fetch water near their house, and who was wearing a sleeveless
her mother Brenda so that Lita Lingkay could take a look at her ˗ just
shirt and shorts at the time he raped her, was convincing and
as Julito Apiki said.120
persuasive. The defense attempted to impute the crime to someone
else – one Julito Apiki, but the child, on rebuttal, was steadfast and did
not equivocate, asserting that it was accused who is younger, and not Above all, for alibi to prosper, it is necessary that the corroboration is
Julito, who is older, who molested her.112 credible, the same having been offered preferably by disinterested
witnesses. The defense failed thuswise. Its witnesses cannot qualify as
such, "they being related or were one way or another linked to each
In a long line of cases, this Court has consistently ruled that the
other."121
determination by the trial court of the credibility of the witnesses
deserves full weight and respect considering that it has "the
opportunity to observe the witnesses’ manner of testifying, their furtive Even assuming for the sake of argument that we consider the
glances, calmness, sighs and the scant or full realization of their corroborations on his whereabouts, still, the defense of alibi cannot
oath,"113 unless it is shown that material facts and circumstances have prosper.
been "ignored, overlooked, misconstrued, or misinterpreted."114
We reiterate, time and again, that the court must be convinced that it
Further, as correctly observed by the trial court: would be physically impossible for the accused to have been at
the locus criminis at the time of the commission of the crime.122
xxx His and his witness’ attempt to throw the court off the track by
imputing the crime to someone else is xxx a vain exercise in view of Physical impossibility refers to distance and the facility of access
the private complainant’s positive identification of accused and other between the situs criminis and the location of the accused when the
corroborative circumstances. Accused also admitted that on the same crime was committed. He must demonstrate that he was so far away
evening, Julito Apiki, the supposed real culprit, asked him "What is this and could not have been physically present at the scene of the crime
incident, Pare?", thus corroborating the latter’s testimony that he and its immediate vicinity when the crime was committed.123
confronted accused after hearing of the incident from the child."115
In People v. Paraiso,124 the distance of two thousand meters from the
On the other hand, we cannot agree with the appellant that the trial place of the commission of the crime was considered not physically
court erred in finding his denial and alibi weak despite the presentation impossible to reach in less than an hour even by foot. 125 Inasmuch as it
of witnesses to corroborate his testimony. Glaring inconsistencies were would take the accused not more than five minutes to rape the victim,
all over their respective testimonies that even destroyed the credibility this Court disregarded the testimony of the defense witness attesting
of the appellant’s very testimony. that the accused was fast asleep when she left to gather bamboo trees
and returned several hours after. She could have merely presumed
that the accused slept all throughout.126
Appellant testified that it was his uncle Alejandro Perocho who sent
him to store to buy Tanduay; that he gave the bottle to his uncle; and
that they had already been drinking long before he bought Tanduay at In People v. Antivola,127 the testimonies of relatives and friends
the store. corroborating that of the appellant that he was in their company at the
time of the commission of the crime were likewise disregarded by this
Court in the following manner:
This was contradicted by the testimony of his aunt Gloria, wife of his
uncle Alejandro. On cross-examination, she revealed that her husband
was not around before, during, and after the rape incident because he Ruben Nicolas, the appellant’s part-time employer, and Marites
was then at work.116 He arrived from work only after FFF came to their Capalad, the appellant’s sister-in-law and co-worker, in unison,
house for the second time and boxed appellant.117 It was actually the vouched for the appellant’s physical presence in the fishpond at the
fish vendor, not her husband, who asked appellant to buy time Rachel was raped. It is, however, an established fact that the
Tanduay.118 Further, the drinking session started only after the appellant’s house where the rape occurred, was a stone’s throw
appellant’s errand to the store.119 away from the fishpond. Their claim that the appellant never left
their sight the entire afternoon of December 4, 1997 is
unacceptable. It was impossible for Marites to have kept an eye on
Neither was the testimony of Luzvilla credible enough to deserve
the appellant for almost four hours, since she testified that she, too,
consideration.
was very much occupied with her task of counting and recording the
fishes being harvested. Likewise, Mr. Nicolas, who, admittedly was 50
Just like appellant, Luzvilla testified that Alejandro joined the drinking meters away from the fishpond, could not have focused his entire
session. This is contrary to Gloria’s statement that her husband was at attention solely on the appellant. It is, therefore, not farfetched that
work. the appellant easily sneaked out unnoticed, and along the way
inveigled the victim, brought her inside his house and ravished
her, then returned to the fishpond as if he never left.128 (Emphasis
Luzvilla’s testimony is likewise inconsistent with that of sur-rebuttal supplied.)1avvphi1
witness Antonia Perocho. Antonia recalled that Julito arrived without a
As in the cases above cited, the claim of the defense witnesses that when rape is committed against a child below seven (7) years
appellant never left their sight, save from the 5-minute errand to the old141 applies.
store, is contrary to ordinary human experience. Moreover, considering
that the farmland where the crime was committed is just behind the
The following, however, calls for the reduction of the penalty: (1) the
house of the Perochos, it would take appellant only a few minutes to
prohibition against the imposition of the penalty of death in accordance
bring AAA from the road near the store next to the Perochos down the
with Republic Act No. 9346;142 and (2) the privileged mitigating
farmland and consummate the crime. As correctly pointed out by the
circumstance of minority of the appellant, which has the effect of
Court of Appeals, appellant could have committed the rape after buying
reducing the penalty one degree lower than that prescribed by law,
the bottle of Tanduay and immediately returned to his uncle’s
pursuant to Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code.143
house.129 Unfortunately, the testimonies of his corroborating witnesses
even bolstered the fact that he was within the immediate vicinity of the
scene of the crime.130 Relying on People v. Bon,144 the Court of Appeals excluded death from
the graduation of penalties provided in Article 71 of the Revised Penal
Code.145 Consequently, in its appreciation of the privileged mitigating
Clearly, the defense failed to prove that it was physically impossible for
circumstance of minority of appellant, it lowered the penalty one
appellant to have been at the time and place of the commission of the
degree from reclusion perpetua and sentenced appellant to suffer the
crime.
indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12)
years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four
All considered, we find that the prosecution has sufficiently established (4) months of reclusion temporal, in its medium period, as maximum.146
the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
We differ.
III
In a more recent case,147 the Court En Banc, through the Honorable
In the determination of the imposable penalty, the Court of Appeals Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-de Castro, clarified:
correctly considered Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Act of 2006) despite the commission of the crime three (3)
Under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code, when the offender is a
years before it was enacted on 28 April 2006.
minor under 18 years, the penalty next lower than that prescribed by
law shall be imposed, but always in the proper period. However, for
We recognize its retroactive application following the rationale purposes of determining the proper penalty because of the
elucidated in People v. Sarcia:131 privileged mitigating circumstance of minority, the penalty of
death is still the penalty to be reckoned with. Thus, the proper
imposable penalty for the accused-appellant is reclusion
[Sec. 68 of Republic Act No. 9344] 132 allows the retroactive application
perpetua.148 (Emphasis supplied.)
of the Act to those who have been convicted and are serving sentence
at the time of the effectivity of this said Act, and who were below the
age of 18 years at the time of the commission of the offense. With Accordingly, appellant should be meted the penalty of reclusion
more reason, the Act should apply to this case wherein the perpetua.
conviction by the lower court is still under review. 133 (Emphasis
supplied.)
Civil Liability

Criminal Liability; Imposable Penalty

We have consistently ruled that:

Sec. 6 of Republic Act No. 9344 exempts a child above fifteen (15)
The litmus test xxx in the determination of the civil indemnity is the
years but below eighteen (18) years of age from criminal liability,
heinous character of the crime committed, which would have warranted
unless the child is found to have acted with discernment, in which
the imposition of the death penalty, regardless of whether the penalty
case, "the appropriate proceedings" in accordance with the Act shall be
actually imposed is reduced to reclusion perpetua.149
observed.134

Likewise, the fact that the offender was still a minor at the time he
We determine discernment in this wise:
committed the crime has no bearing on the gravity and extent of injury
suffered by the victim and her family.150 The respective awards of civil
Discernment is that mental capacity of a minor to fully appreciate the indemnity and moral damages in the amount of ₱75,000.00 each are,
consequences of his unlawful act.135 Such capacity may be known and therefore, proper.151
should be determined by taking into consideration all the facts and
circumstances afforded by the records in each case.136
Accordingly, despite the presence of the privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority which effectively lowered the penalty by one
xxx The surrounding circumstances must demonstrate that the minor degree, we affirm the damages awarded by the Court of Appeals in the
knew what he was doing and that it was wrong.137 Such circumstance amount of ₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity and ₱75,000.00 as moral
includes the gruesome nature of the crime and the minor’s cunning and damages. And, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence,152 the amount
shrewdness.138 of exemplary damages should be increased from ₱25,000.00 to
₱30,000.00.
In the present case, we agree with the Court of Appeals that: "(1)
choosing an isolated and dark place to perpetrate the crime, to prevent Automatic Suspension of Sentence; Duration; Appropriate Disposition
detection[;] and (2) boxing the victim xxx, to weaken her defense" are after the Lapse of the Period of Suspension of Sentence
indicative of then seventeen (17) year-old appellant’s mental capacity
to fully understand the consequences of his unlawful action.139
Republic Act No. 9344 warrants the suspension of sentence of a child
in conflict with the law notwithstanding that he/she has reached the age
Nonetheless, the corresponding imposable penalty should be modified. of majority at the time the judgment of conviction is pronounced. Thus:

The birth certificate of AAA140 shows that she was born on 3 December SEC. 38. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. - Once the child who is
1997. Considering that she was only five (5) years old when appellant under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the
defiled her on 28 January 2003, the law prescribing the death penalty offense is found guilty of the offense charged, the court shall determine
and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the
offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of conviction is not material. What matters is that the offender committed
conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under the offense when he/she was still of tender age.
suspended sentence, without need of application: Provided, however,
That suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the
Thus, appellant may be confined in an agricultural camp or any other
juvenile is already eighteen (18) years of age or more at the time
training facility in accordance with Sec. 51 of Republic Act No. 9344.164
of the pronouncement of his/her guilt. (Emphasis supplied.)

Sec. 51. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and

xxxx
Other Training Facilities. – A child in conflict with the law may, after
conviction and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
Applying Declarador v. Gubaton,153 which was promulgated on 18 sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution, in an
August 2006, the Court of Appeals held that, consistent with Article 192 agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established,
of Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, 154 the aforestated maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in coordination
provision does not apply to one who has been convicted of an offense with the DSWD.
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.155
Following the pronouncement in Sarcia,165 the case shall be remanded
Meanwhile, on 10 September 2009, this Court promulgated the to the court of origin to effect appellant’s confinement in an agricultrual
decision in Sarcia,156 overturning the ruling in Gubaton. Thus: camp or other training facility.

The xxx provision makes no distinction as to the nature of the offense WHEREFORE, the Decision dated 29 August 2007 of the Court of
committed by the child in conflict with the law, unlike P.D. No. 603 and Appeals in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00213 finding appellant Hermie M.
A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC. The said P.D. and Supreme Court (SC) Rule Jacinto guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape
provide that the benefit of suspended sentence would not apply to a is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: (1) the death
child in conflict with the law if, among others, he/she has been penalty imposed on the appellant is reduced to reclusion perpetua; and
convicted of an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life (2) appellant is ordered to pay the victim P75,000.00 as civil indemnity,
imprisonment. In construing Sec. 38 of R.A. No. 9344, the Court is P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary
guided by the basic principle of statutory construction that when the damages. The case is hereby REMANDED to the court of origin for its
law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish. Since R.A. No. appropriate action in accordance with Section 51 of Republic Act No.
9344 does not distinguish between a minor who has been convicted of 9344.
a capital offense and another who has been convicted of a lesser
offense, the Court should also not distinguish and should apply the
SO ORDERED.
automatic suspension of sentence to a child in conflict with the law who
has been found guilty of a heinous crime.157

The legislative intent reflected in the Senate deliberations 158 on Senate

Bill No. 1402 (Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of
2005) further strengthened the new position of this Court to cover
heinous crimes in the application of the provision on the automatic
suspension of sentence of a child in conflict with the law. The pertinent
portion of the deliberation reads:

If a mature minor, maybe 16 years old to below 18 years old is

charged, accused with, or may have committed a serious offense, and
may have acted with discernment, then the child could be
recommended by the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD), by the Local Council for the Protection of Children (LCPC), or
by [Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s] proposed Office of Juvenile
Welfare and Restoration to go through a judicial proceeding; but the
welfare, best interests, and restoration of the child should still be a
primordial or primary consideration. Even in heinous crimes, the
intention should still be the child’s restoration, rehabilitation and
reintegration. xxx (Italics supplied in Sarcia.)159

On 24 November 2009, the Court En Banc promulgated the Revised

Rule on Children in Conflict with the Law, which reflected the same
position.160

These developments notwithstanding, we find that the benefits of a

suspended sentence can no longer apply to appellant. The suspension
of sentence lasts only until the child in conflict with the law reaches the
maximum age of twenty-one (21) years.161 Section 40162 of the law and
Section 48163 of the Rule are clear on the matter. Unfortunately,
appellant is now twenty-five (25) years old.

Be that as it may, to give meaning to the legislative intent of the Act,

the promotion of the welfare of a child in conflict with the law should
extend even to one who has exceeded the age limit of twenty-one (21)
years, so long as he/she committed the crime when he/she was still a
child. The offender shall be entitled to the right to restoration,
rehabilitation and reintegration in accordance with the Act in order that
he/she is given the chance to live a normal life and become a
productive member of the community. The age of the child in conflict
with the law at the time of the promulgation of the judgment of
 witness for the prosecution (People v. Rojo, 175 SCRA 119 [1989]).

6. ID.; ID.; ID.; PRESUMPTION THAT OFFICIAL DUTY HAS BEEN

REGULARLY PERFORMED CANNOT PREVAIL OVER
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. — This Court has stated that the
common modus operandi of narcotic agents of utilizing poseur-buyers
does not always commend itself as the most reliable way to go after
violators of the Dangerous Drugs Act as it is susceptible to mistake as
well as to harassment, extortion and abuse (People v. Fernando, 145
SCRA 159 [1986]; People v. Yutuc y Tellis, G.R. No. 82590, July 26,
1990). In any event, the presumption that official duty has been
regularly performed cannot by itself, prevail against the constitutional
presumption of innocence accorded an accused. (People v. Ale,
supra).

7. ID.; ID.; CREDIBILITY; EVIDENCE TO BE BELIEVED MUST NOT

ONLY PROCEED FROM THE MOUTH OF A CREDIBLE WITNESS
BUT MUST BE CREDIBLE IN ITSELF. — Evidence to be believed
must not only proceed from the mouth of credible witnesses but must
be credible in itself (People v. Dimacali, 153 SCRA 454 [1987]). No
better test has yet been found to measure the value of a witness than
its conformity to knowledge and common experience of mankind
(People v. Maribung, 149 SCRA 292 [1987]).
[G.R. No. 86975. March 18, 1991.]
8. ID.; ID.; WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY; CONVICTION MUST COME
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARLON FROM THE STRENGTH OF THE PROSECUTION’S EVIDENCE AND
SALCEDO y SISON, Accused-Appellant. NOT FROM THE WEAKNESS OF THE DEFENSE. — Conviction must
come from the strength of the prosecution’s evidence and not from the
The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee. weakness of the defense (People v. Magallanes, 147 SCRA 92
[1987]); neither can the prosecution be relieved of the onus of proving
Public Attorney’s Office for Accused-Appellant. guilt beyond reasonable doubt by the weakness of the defense (People
v. Sadie, 149 SCRA 240 [1987]).

SYLLABUS 9. ID.; ID.; GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT; IF

INCULPATORY FACTS ARE CAPABLE OF TWO OR MORE
EXPLANATIONS, ONE CONSISTENT WITH THE INNOCENCE OF
THE ACCUSED AND THE OTHER HIS GUILT, THE EVIDENCE IS
1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY; FINDINGS OF FACT NOT SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT CONVICTION. — A careful review
OF THE TRIAL COURT, GENERALLY ENTITLED TO GREAT of the records shows numerous inconsistencies and contradictory
RESPECT. — The findings of the trial court on the issue of credibility of statements of the prosecution witnesses that cannot support with moral
witnesses and their testimonies are entitled to great respect and certainty a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Indeed it is well
accorded the highest consideration by appellate courts (People v. established that if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable
Carido, 167 SCRA 462 [1988]; People v. Ramos, 162 SCRA 794 of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with the
[1988]). innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt, the
evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; RATIONALE. — Credibility "is a matter that is to support conviction (People v. Taruc, 157 SCRA 178 [1988]).
peculiarly within the province of the trial judge, who had the first hand
opportunity to watch and observe the demeanor and behaviour of
witnesses both for the prosecution and the defense at the time of their
testimony" (People v. Turla, 167 SCRA 278 [1988]). DECISION

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTIONS. — But this rule is not without
exception. Thus, it does not apply where the lower court overlooked PARAS, J.:
certain facts of substance and value that if considered, would affect the
result of the case (People v. Royeras, 130 SCRA 265 [1984]; People v.
Martinez, 144 SCRA 303 [1986]; Arcadio Cortez y Vengzon v. C.A. and
People of the Philippines, 163 SCRA 139 [1988]). In fact, it has been This is an appeal interposed by Marlon Salcedo from the decision ** of
settled that the Supreme Court is not bound by factual findings of the the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch VI, in Criminal Case No. 84-
lower court which are contradicted by the evidence (Edward A. Keller & 30953 for violation of Article II, Section 4, in relation to Section 2 (e-1)
Co. Ltd. v. C.O.B. Group Marketing Inc., 141 SCRA 86 [1986]). and (i), of Republic Act 6425, as amended by P.D. 1675, otherwise
known as the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, entitled "People v. Marlon
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; AFFECTED BY IRRECONCILABLE Salcedo y Sison," finding him guilty as charged, the dispositive portion
CONTRADICTIONS. — As ruled by this Court, irreconcilable and of which reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
unexplained contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution
witnesses cast doubt on the guilt of appellant (People v. Caboverde, "IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the guilt of the
160 SCRA 550 [1988]) and his culpability to the crime charged (People accused having been proven beyond reasonable doubt of a violation of
v. CFI of Rizal, Branch IV, Quezon City, 161 SCRA 249 [1988]). Sec. 4, Article II, in relation to Sec. 2 (e-1) and (i) of Rep. Act No. 6425
and further amended by P.D. 1675, and there is no showing that he is
5. ID.; ID.; BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS; EVIDENCE properly licensed or has any authority to dispose of the prohibited
WILLFULLY SUPPRESSED WOULD BE ADVERSED IF PRODUCED. drugs, he is hereby sentenced to Life Imprisonment, to pay a fine of
— Considering appellant’s outright denial and totally different version P20,000.00, and to pay the costs.
of the events resulting in his arrest, it became incumbent upon the
prosecution to rebut appellant’s allegations by presenting Tagana, the SO ORDERED."cralaw virtua1aw library
alleged poseur-buyer. This it failed to do, giving rise to the presumption
that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced [Rule The appellant was charged in an information filed by Second Assistant
131, Sec. 5 (e)]. This failure which as ruled by this Court constitutes a City Fiscal Ramon O. Santiago of Manila on October 18, 1984, which
fatal flaw in the prosecution’s evidence since the so-called informant reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
who was never presented as a witness and never identified, is the best
"The undersigned accuses Marlon Salcedo y Sison of a violation of People of the Philippines, 163 SCRA 139 [1988]). In fact, it has been
Section 4, Article II, in relation to Section 2 (e-1) and (i) of Republic Act settled that the Supreme Court is not bound by factual findings of the
No. 6425 and further amended by P.D. 1675, committed as lower court which are contradicted by the evidence (Edward A. Keller &
follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph Co. Ltd. v. C.O.B. Group Marketing Inc., 141 SCRA 86
[1986]).chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad
"That on or about October 17, 1984, in the City of Manila, Philippines,
the said accused, not being authorized by law to sell, deliver, give The case at bar falls under the exception as the trial court failed to
away to another or distribute any prohibited drugs, did then and there consider the conflicting testimonies of the prosecution witnesses,
willfully, unlawfully and knowingly sell, deliver or give away to another a particularly those of Pats. Rodrigo Basilio, Renato Borela and Feliciano
teabag of dried flowering tops of marijuana, a prohibited drug. Sarte with regard to the conduct of the alleged buy-bust operation,
which as correctly noted not only by the defense but by the Solicitor
"Contrary to law." (Rollo 5; p. 1, Original Record). General himself that if considered, would have greatly affected the
result of the case.
Upon arraignment, the accused-appellant entered a plea of not guilty to
the crime charged (Original Record, p. 3) The inconsistencies pointed out in the case at bar, are as
follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
After trial, on the basis of the evidence presented, the findings of the
trial court are as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph First: Pat. Basilio claimed that upon receiving a tip-off from their
alleged informant, Eugene Tagana, their Commanding Officer Pacifico
"The testimonial and documentary evidences adduced by the Calling ordered him (Basilio), Patrolmen Tan, Borela, and Chua to the
prosecution clearly established the fact that on October 17, 1984, at place mentioned by Tagana in order to apprehend the appellant (TSN,
around between 4:00 and 5:00 o’clock in the Hearing of January 16, 1985, p. 11)
afternoon, Accused Marlon Salcedo tried to dispose or sell one plastic
teabag of dried marijuana leaves to Eugene Tagana at the price of On the other hand, Borela claimed that upon receiving the phone call
P10.00. Eugene Tagana acted as a buyer and in fact Tagana delivered from Tagana, he (Borela) immediately mapped out a buy-bust
the two P5.00-bills to Marlon Salcedo representing the cost of one operation and proceeded to Gomez St., Paco, Manila without
teabag of marijuana dried leaves. The two P5.00-bills were accepted mentioning that it was made in response to an order issued by a
by the accused Marlon Salcedo and upon acceptance of the two superior officer (TSN, Hearing of April 29, 1985, p. 33)
P5.00-bills from Eugene Tagana, he, Marlon Salcedo proceeded to an
alley to get the necessary stuff as ordered by Eugene Tagana. A few Second: Basilio claimed that the police officers who mounted the
minutes thereafter, Marlon Salcedo returned with the stuff and tried to operation consisted of himself, Borela, Tan and Chua (TSN, Hearing of
deliver the stuff which is contained in a plastic container of one teabag January 16, 1985, p. 11).
of dried marijuana leaves. It was at this moment that the policemen,
namely: Pat. Renato Borela, Pat. Rodrigo Basilio, Pat. Reynaldo Tan On the other hand, Borela, who acted as the team leader of the
and Pat. Danilo Chua closed in and tried to arrest Marlon Salcedo. operation and who conceived of the alleged entrapment plan (TSN,
However, when Marlon Salcedo had noticed the approach of the Hearing of April 29, 1985, p. 45), identified the apprehending team as
policemen, he, Marlon Salcedo threw the plastic container containing consisting only of Tan, Chua and himself (Borela) (p. 38, supra). All
the teabag of dried marijuana leaves to the river bank. However, the throughout Borela’s testimony, no mention was made of Basilio’s
said teabag thrown by Marlon Salcedo was retrieved by Pat. Basilio participation in the operation. Likewise, Pat. Sarte testified that the
and thereafter Pat. Basilio frisked the pocket of Marlon Salcedo and apprehending officers were Borela, Tan, and Chua only (TSN, Hearing
confiscated the two P5.00-bills delivered by Eugene Tagana to him as of April 15, 1985, p. 33)
a result of which the policemen arrested the accused and took him to
the police headquarters for further investigation. The marijuana dried Third: Basilio alleged that two (2) five peso (P5.00) bills were used in
leaves contained in the teabag was referred to the Forensic Chemistry the operation (TSN, Hearing of January 16, 1985, pp. 13-14). Borela,
Section of the NBI and Forensic Chemist Ma. Carina Madrigal-Javier however, testified that only one (1) ten peso (P10.00) bill was used
clearly examined and determined whether the teabag which was (TSN, Hearing of April 29, 1985, pp. 38; 42)
referred to her for verification was positive or not of marijuana. Upon
her microscopic, chemical and chromotographic examinations, the Sarte corroborated Borela’s testimony that only one ten peso (P10.00)
specimen was positive for marijuana as contained in her report marked bill was used (TSN, Hearing of April 15, 1985, p. 35)
Exh.’B’ and final examination report marked Exh.’C’. There is no doubt
that the one plastic teabag containing dried marijuana leaves and The reasons for the difference in the testimonies of these witnesses
flowering tops which the accused had sold to Eugene Tagana was were not explained by the prosecution. Even the court a quo itself
positive for marijuana. The defense of the accused that it was not he closed its eyes on these irreconcilable testimonies as it adopted the
who brought the plastic teabag containing marijuana and it was testimony of Basilio that two (2) five peso (P5.00) bills were utilized by
Eugene Tagana who pleaded to him to be delivered to one Magat and the police officers, a fact which is contrary to the testimony of Borela,
it was Eugene Tagana, who threw the said teabag to the river bank, is as corroborated by Sarte.
not only unbelievable but incredible. The defense of the accused is a
last ditch defense in order to exculpate himself from any liability of Fourth: In his testimony, Basilio stated that he was the one who
selling prohibited drug."cralaw virtua1aw library retrieved the packet of marijuana from the river bank after appellant
threw the same (p. 13 supra).
As earlier stated, the Court a quo convicted the appellant of the crime
charged. In contrast, Borela adamantly declared that it was Tan who recovered
the same from the river bank (p. 39, supra)
The only issue in this appeal hinges on the credibility of witnesses.
Fifth: Without any hesitation, Basilio testified that he (Basilio) and Chua
Verily, there is no question that the findings of the trial court on the were the ones who brought the packet of marijuana to the NBI for
issue of credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are entitled to examination (p. 14, supra). Borela, on the other hand, first claimed that
great respect and accorded the highest consideration by appellate he did not know who brought the packet of marijuana to the NBI (p. 41,
courts (People v. Carido, 167 SCRA 462 [1988]; People v. Ramos, 162 supra). It was only after some prodding from the court that Borela
SCRA 794 [1988] and that credibility "is a matter that is peculiarly suddenly "remembered" positively that he was the one who brought the
within the province of the trial judge, who had the first hand opportunity specimen to the NBI (Ibid.)
to watch and observe the demeanor and behaviour of witnesses both
for the prosecution and the defense at the time of their testimony" Sixth: As to the whereabouts of the money used in the alleged buy-
(People v. Turla, 167 SCRA 278 [1988]). But this rule is not without bust operation, Pat. Basilio stated that the money was recovered from
exception. Thus, it does not apply where the lower court overlooked Tagana and that the money was with Pat. Borela. The court a quo
certain facts of substance and value that if considered, would affect the asked the same question and received the same answer (pp. 13-14,
result of the case (People v. Royeras, 130 SCRA 265 [1984]; People v. supra), in contrast to the findings of the court that the money was
Martinez, 144 SCRA 303 [1986]; Arcadio Cortez y Vengzon v. C.A. and confiscated from the accused when the latter was apprehended.
 possession of the packet of marijuana and it was also Tagana who had
This wavering testimony of Basilio is repeated in Borela’s testimony asked the accused-appellant to accompany him to the house of Rudy
who testified on whether or not it was recovered but never mentioned Magat. Accused’s testimony remained unshaken despite rigid cross-
from whom it was recovered, viz:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph examination.

"Q — This P10.00 bill was not recovered? This Court has observed that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

A — Yes sir (p. 42, supra). "Judges trying narcotics cases are often placed in a non-enviable
predicament. The threat posed by drugs against human dignity and the
Court. integrity of society is malevolent and incessant. Courts should not
hamper, in any way the dedicated although sometimes puny efforts to
Q — Now, correct me if I am wrong, you stated that the P10.00 bill that stem the giant menace. Courts should not unwittingly tie down the
you gave to Tagana was not recovered, is that right? hands of narcotic agents whose work is already difficult and dangerous
enough without legal and procedural obstacles to successful
A — Yes sir. prosecutions.

Q — Even up to the present? "At the same time we cannot close our eyes to the many reports of
evidence being planted on unwary persons either for extorting money
A — No sir. or exacting personal vengeance. By the very nature of anti-narcotics
operations, the need for entrapment procedures, the use of shady
Will you please read the booking sheet and arrest report wherein your characters as informants, the ease with which sticks of marijuana or
signature appears? grams of heroin can be planted in pockets or hands of unsuspecting
provincial hicks, and the secrecy that inevitably shrouds all drug deals,
A — (Witness reading the document). the possibility of abuse is great. Courts must also be extra vigilant in
trying drug charges lest an innocent person is made to suffer the
Q — Wherein it appears that the suspected marijuana which was found usually severe penalties for drug offenses. (People v. Ale, 145 SCRA
positive and the P10.00 bill were recovered from him and signed by 58-59 [1986]).
you?
Considering appellant’s outright denial and totally different version of
A — Yes your honor" (p. 43, supra). the events resulting in his arrest, it became incumbent upon the
prosecution to rebut appellant’s allegations by presenting Tagana, the
Still further, the testimonies of Basilio and Borela are proofs that they alleged poseur-buyer. This it failed to do, giving rise to the presumption
have either forgotten the incidents of the arrest or they were merely that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced [Rule
fabricating the circumstances thereof. Thus, the statement of Basilio 131, Sec. 5 (e)]. This failure which as ruled by this Court constitutes a
that he and his companions proceeded to Paco at 2:00 o’clock in the fatal flaw in the prosecution’s evidence since the so-called informant
afternoon cannot be reconciled with the claim of Borela that the tip-off who was never presented as a witness and never identified, is the best
was received by phone call only at 2:00 o’clock in the afternoon (p. 16, witness for the prosecution (People v. Rojo, 175 SCRA 119 [1989]). In
supra). Considering that according to Borela, said tip-off had still to be fact, this Court has stated that the common modus operandi of narcotic
confirmed at the station, it is highly improbable for the police contingent agents of utilizing poseur-buyers does not always commend itself as
to have been in Paco at 2:00 o’clock in the afternoon as claimed by the most reliable way to go after violators of the Dangerous Drugs Act
Basilio. The prosecution did not even attempt to reconcile the as it is susceptible to mistake as well as to harassment, extortion and
contradictory testimonies of said witnesses, rendering them unworthy abuse (People v. Fernando, 145 SCRA 159 [1986]; People v. Yutuc y
of full faith and credence. Tellis, G.R. No. 82590, July 26, 1990). In any event, the presumption
that official duty has been regularly performed cannot by itself, prevail
As ruled by this Court, irreconcilable and unexplained contradictions in against the constitutional presumption of innocence accorded an
the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses cast doubt on the guilt of accused. (People v. Ale, supra).
appellant (People v. Caboverde, 160 SCRA 550 [1988]) and his
culpability to the crime charged (People v. CFI of Rizal, Branch IV, The improbability of the prosecution’s version becomes more manifest
Quezon City, 161 SCRA 249 [1988]).chanrobles.com:cralaw:red when scrutinized as to the alleged conduct of the accused in the illegal
transaction. It was supposed to have been carried out in full view of the
The last four (4) inconsistencies pointed out by the defense are very public which include the apprehending police officers, for the small
serious contradictions and since they have not been explained, We find amount of P10.00. It is a truism that evidence to be believed must not
them indicative of appellant’s innocence. only proceed from the mouth of credible witnesses but must be
credible in itself (People v. Dimacali, 153 SCRA 454 [1987]). No better
In contrast to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, the test has yet been found to measure the value of a witness than its
testimony of Marlon Salcedo was straightforward and unwavering. conformity to knowledge and common experience of mankind (People
v. Maribung, 149 SCRA 292 [1987]). Undoubtedly, the prosecution’s
He testified that he is 23 years old, single, a construction worker, and version of the manner by which appellant conducted the drug
residing at 1467 Int. 33 Gomez St., Paco, Manila; that between 4:00 to trafficking business is not in conformity with common
5:00 o’clock in the afternoon, he was at his residence watching a pool experience.chanrobles.com:cralaw:red
game, when a boy by the name of Eugene Tagana called him and
asked for Rudy Magat. When Tagana approached him asking for Rudy Conviction must come from the strength of the prosecution’s evidence
Magat, he (Tagana) was holding a plastic bag of marijuana which he, and not from the weakness of the defense (People v. Magallanes, 147
(Tagana) would sell to Rudy Magat. While the two were conversing SCRA 92 [1987]); neither can the prosecution be relieved of the onus
near the river bank, the accused rejected the plea of Eugene Tagana of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt by the weakness of the
that the plastic bag of marijuana dried leaves be delivered to Magat. defense (People v. Sadie, 149 SCRA 240 [1987]).
While they were arguing about the matter, the policemen arrested him
and Eugene Tagana threw the plastic bag of marijuana into the river. A careful review of the records shows numerous inconsistencies and
He was frisked by the policemen and when the policemen did not contradictory statements of the prosecution witnesses that cannot
recover anything from his body, they brought him to police support with moral certainty a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
headquarters. Inside the police headquarters the father of Eugene Indeed it is well established that if the inculpatory facts and
Tagana was present and he (the father) hit him with a rattan cane while circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of which
he was being maltreated by the policemen. Under such maltreatment, is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other
he was forced to sign his name on a piece of paper. On another consistent with his guilt, the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral
occasion in 1984, he had likewise been arrested by the policemen who certainty and is not sufficient to support conviction (People v. Taruc,
mistook him for Rudy Magat who had snatched a necklace. 157 SCRA 178 [1988])

His testimony was clear and explicit that it was Tagana who was in PREMISES CONSIDERED, the appealed decision is hereby
REVERSED and the accused-appellant is hereby ACQUITTED on The police officers, still in the area of operation and in the presence of
reasonable doubt. barangay officials Richard S. Tandoy and Gresilda B. Tumala,
searched the appellant and found a big sachet of shabu. PO1 Simon
SO ORDERED. also pointed to the barangay officials the marked money, two pieces of
₱100 bill, thrown by the appellant on the ground.

After the operation, and in the presence of the same barangay officials,
the police officers made an inventory of the items recovered from the
appellant which are: (1) one big sachet of shabu which they marked as
RMP-1-10-01-03; (2) one small sachet of shabu which they marked as
RMP 2-10-01-03; and (3) two (2) pieces of one hundred pesos marked
money and a fifty peso (₱50) bill. Thereafter, a letter-request was
prepared by Inspector Ferdinand B. Dacillo for the laboratory
examination of the two (2) sachets containing a crystalline substance,
ultra-violet examination on the person of the appellant as well as the
two (2) pieces of one hundred pesos marked money. The request was
brought by PO1 Pajo and personally received by Police Inspector
Virginia Sison-Gucor, Forensic Chemical Officer of the Regional Crime
Laboratory Office XII Butuan City, who immediately conducted the
examination. The laboratory examination revealed that the appellant
tested positive for the presence of bright orange ultra-violet fluorescent
powder; and the crystalline substance contained in two sachets,
separately marked as RMP-1-10-01-03 and RMP-2-10-01-03, were
positively identified as methamphetamine hydrochloride.

Thereafter, two separate Informations were filed before the RTC of

Butuan City against appellant for violation of Sections 5 and 11 of RA
9165, stating the following:

Criminal Case No. 10250

G.R. No. 186227               July 20, 2011 That on or about the evening of October 1, 1003 at Purok 4, Barangay
3, Agao, Butuan City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without authority of law,
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously sell zero point
vs. zero four one two (0.0412) grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride,
ALLEN UDTOJAN MANTALABA, Accused-Appellant. otherwise known as shabu which is a dangerous drug.

DECISION CONTRARY TO LAW : (Violation of Sec. 5, Art. II of R.A. No. 9165).3

PERALTA, J.: Criminal Case No. 10251

For this Court's consideration is the Decision1 dated July 31, 2008 of That on or about the evening of October 1, 2003 at Purok 4, Barangay
the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00240-MIN, 3, Agao, Butuan City, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this
affirming the Omnibus Judgment2 dated September 14, 2005, of the Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without authority of law,
Regional Trial Court, Branch 1, Butuan City in Criminal Case No. did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously possess zero
10250 and Criminal Case No. 10251, finding appellant Allen Udtojan point six one three one (0.6131) grams of methamphetamine
Mantalaba, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sections 5 hydrochloride, otherwise known as shabu, which is a dangerous drug.
and 11, Article II of Republic Act (RA) 9165.

CONTRARY TO LAW: (Violation of Section 11, Art. II of R.A. No.

The facts, as culled from the records, are the following: 9165).4

The Task Force Regional Anti-Crime Emergency Response (RACER) Eventually, the cases were consolidated and tried jointly.
in Butuan City received a report from an informer that a certain Allen
Mantalaba, who was seventeen (17) years old at the time, was
selling shabu at Purok 4, Barangay 3, Agao District, Butuan City. Thus, Appellant pleaded NOT GUILTY to the charges against him.
a buy-bust team was organized, composed of PO1 Randy Pajo, PO1 Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.
Eric Simon and two (2) poseur-buyers who were provided with two (2)
pieces of ₱100 marked bills to be used in the purchase. In its Omnibus Judgment5 dated September 14, 2005, the RTC found
the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense charged,
Around 7 o'clock in the evening of October 1, 2003, the team, armed the dispositive portion of which, reads:
with the marked money, proceeded to Purok 4, Barangay 3, Agao
District, Butuan City for the buy-bust operation. The two poseur-buyers WHEREFORE, the Court hereby finds accused Allen Mantalaba y
approached Allen who was sitting at a corner and said to be in the act Udtojan GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in Criminal Case No. 10250
of selling shabu. PO1 Pajo saw the poseur-buyers and appellant for selling shabu, a dangerous drug, as defined and penalized under
talking to each other. Afterwards, the appellant handed a sachet of Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165. As provided for in Sec.
shabu to one of the poseur-buyers and the latter gave the marked 98 of R.A. 9165, where the offender is a minor, the penalty for acts
money to the appellant. The poseur-buyers went back to the police punishable by life imprisonment to death shall be reclusion perpetua to
officers and told them that the transaction has been completed. Police death. As such, Allen Mantalaba y Udtojan is hereby sentenced to
officers Pajo and Simon rushed to the place and handcuffed the RECLUSION PERPETUA and to pay a fine of Five Hundred Thousand
appellant as he was leaving the place. Pesos (₱500,000.00).
In Criminal Case No. 10251, the Court likewise finds accused Allen A: After briefing of our team, we proceeded immediately to
Mantalaba y Udtojan GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for illegally the area.
possessing shabu, a dangerous drug, weighing 0.6131 gram as
defined and penalized under Section 11, Article II of Republic Act No.
Q: You mentioned of poseur-buyer, what would the poseur-
9165 and accused being a minor at the time of the commission of the
buyer do?
offense, after applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, he is
accordingly sentenced to six (6) years and one (1) day, as minimum, to
eight (8) years, as maximum of prision mayor and to pay a fine of A: We made an arrangement with the poseur-buyer that
Three Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱300,000.00). during the buying of shabu there should be a pre-arranged
signal of the poseur-buyer to the police officer.
SO ORDERED.6
Q: What happened when your poseur-buyer who, armed
with this marked moneys, approached the guy who was
The CA affirmed in toto the decision of the RTC. It disposed of the
selling shabu at that time?
case as follows:

A: The poseur-buyer during that time gave the marked

WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 1,
moneys to the suspect.
Butuan City dated September 14, 2005 appealed from finding the
accused-appellant Allen Udtojan Mantalaba guilty beyond reasonable
doubt with the crime of Violation of Section 5 and Section 11, Article II Q: Where were you when this poseur-buyer gave the
of Republic Act 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive moneys to the suspect?
Dangerous Drugs Act, is AFFIRMED in toto, with costs against
accused-appellant.
A: We positioned ourselves about 10 meters away from the
area of the poseur-buyer and the suspect.
7
SO ORDERED.
Q: You mentioned of the pre-arranged signal, what
Thus, the present appeal. would this be?

Appellant states the lone argument that the lower court gravely erred in A: This is a case-to-case basis, your Honor, in the pre-
convicting him of the crime charged despite failure of the prosecution arrangement signal because in the pre-arranged signal
to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. we used a cap and a towel. (sic) In the case, of this
suspect, there was no towel there was no cap at the time
of giving the shabu and the marked moneys to the
According to appellant, there was no evidence of actual sale between
suspect and considering also that that was about 7:00
him and the poseur-buyer. He also argues that the chain of custody of
o'clock in the evening. The poseur-buyer immediately
the seized shabu was not established. Finally, he asserts that an
proceeded to us and informed us that the shabu was
accused should be presumed innocent and that the burden of proof is
already given by the suspect.
on the prosecution.

Q: What did you do next after that?

The petition is unmeritorious.

A: After examining the sachet of shabu that it was really the

Appellant insists that the prosecution did not present any evidence that
plastic containing white [crystalline] substance, we
an actual sale took place. However, based on the testimony of PO1
immediately approached the suspect.
Randy Pajo, there is no doubt that the buy-bust operation was
successfully conducted, thus:
Q: Who was with a (sic) suspect when you conducted the
buy-bust operation[?] Was he alone or did he had (sic) any
PROS. RUIZ:
companion at that time?

Q: Will you explain to this Honorable Court why did you

A: He was alone.
conduct and how did you conduct your buy-bust operation at
the time?
Q: When you rushed up to the suspect what did you do?
A: We conducted a buy-bust operation because of the report
from our civilian assets that Allen Mantalaba was engaged in A: We informed the suspect that we are the police officers
drug trade and selling shabu. And after we evaluated this and he has this constitutional rights and we immediately
Information we informed Inspector Dacillo that we will handcuffed him.
operate this accused for possible apprehension.
Q: Where were the marked moneys?
Q: Before you conducted your buy-bust operation, what
procedure did you take?
A: The marked moneys were thrown on the ground. After we
handcuffed the suspect, we did not immediately searched in.
A: We prepared the operational plan for buy-bust against the We called the attention of the barangay officials to witness
suspect. We prepared a request for powder dusting for our the search of the suspect.
marked moneys to be used for the operation.
Q: How many sachets of shabu have you taken from the
Q: Did you use marked moneys in this case? suspect during the buy-bust operation?

xxxx A: We took from the possession of the suspect one big

sachet of shabu.
Q: Then armed with these marked moneys, what steps did
you take next? xxxx
 Q: What was the result of the searched (sic) for him? In People v. Ganguso,18 it has been held that prior surveillance is not a
prerequisite for the validity of an entrapment operation, especially
when the buy-bust team members were accompanied to the scene by
A: We confiscated one big sachet of suspected shabu and
their informant. In the instant case, the arresting officers were led to the
the retrieval of 2 pieces of 100 peso bills as marked
scene by the poseur-buyer. Granting that there was no surveillance
moneys.8
conducted before the buy-bust operation, this Court held in People v.
Tranca,19 that there is no rigid or textbook method of conducting buy-
What determines if there was, indeed, a sale of dangerous bust operations. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. The police
drugs in a buy-bust operation is proof of the concurrence of officers may decide that time is of the essence and dispense with the
all the elements of the offense, to wit: (1) the identity of the need for prior surveillance.20
buyer and the seller, the object, and the consideration; and
(2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment
The rule is that the findings of the trial court on the credibility of
therefor.9 From the above testimony of the prosecution
witnesses are entitled to great respect because trial courts have the
witness, it was well established that the elements have been
advantage of observing the demeanor of the witnesses as they testify.
satisfactorily met. The seller and the poseur-buyer were
This is more true if such findings were affirmed by the appellate court.
properly identified. The subject dangerous drug, as well as
When the trial court's findings have been affirmed by the appellate
the marked money used, were also satisfactorily presented.
court, said findings are generally binding upon this Court.21
The testimony was also clear as to the manner in which the
buy-bust operation was conducted.
In connection therewith, the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, was also
correct in finding that the appellant is equally guilty of violation of
To corroborate the testimony of PO2 Pajo, the prosecution
Section 11 of RA 9165, or the illegal possession of dangerous drug. As
presented the testimony of Police Inspector Virginia Sison-
an incident to the lawful arrest of the appellant after the consummation
Gucor, a forensic chemical officer, who confirmed that the
of the buy-bust operation, the arresting officers had the authority to
plastic containing white crystalline substance was positive for
search the person of the appellant. In the said search, the appellant
methamphetamine hydrochloride and that the petitioner was
was caught in possession of 0.6131 grams of shabu. In illegal
in possession of the marked money used in the buy-bust
possession of dangerous drugs, the elements are: (1) the accused is in
operation, thus:
possession of an item or object which is identified to be a prohibited
drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the
PROS. RUIZ: accused freely and consciously possessed the said drug.22

Q: What was the result of your examination or what were As a defense, appellant denied that he owns the shabu and the
your findings on the sachets of suspected shabu? marked money confiscated from him. However, based on his cross-
examination, such denial was not convincing enough to merit
reasonable doubt, thus:
A: After the preliminary and confirmatory tests were
conducted on the stated specimen, the result was positive
for methamphetamine hydrochloride, a dangerous drug. PROS. RUIZ:

xxxx Q: So it is true now that when these police officers

passed you by they recovered from your possession
one sachet of shabu?
Q: What were your findings when you examined the living
person of the accused, as well as the marked money
mentioned in this report? A: Yes, sir.

A: According to my report, the findings for the living person Q: And it is true that after you were arrested and when
of Allen Udtojan Mantalaba is positive to the test for the you were searched they also found another sachet of
presence of bright orange ultra-violet flourescent powder. x x shabu also in your pocket?
x10
A: Yes, sir.
The above only confirms that the buy-bust operation really occurred.
Once again, this Court stresses that a buy-bust operation is a legally
Q: And you mentioned in your counter-affidavit marked as
effective and proven procedure, sanctioned by law, for apprehending
Exhibit H for the prosecution that no money was taken from
drug peddlers and distributors.11 It is often utilized by law enforcers for
you because you have none at that time, is it not?
the purpose of trapping and capturing lawbreakers in the execution of
their nefarious activities.12 In People v. Roa,13 this Court had the
opportunity to expound on the nature and importance of a buy-bust A: None sir, only the ₱250.00 which Jonald Ybanoso left to
operation, ruling that: me.

In the first place, coordination with the PDEA is not an indispensable Q: This ₱250.00 which Jonald left to you was also
requirement before police authorities may carry out a buy-bust confiscated from your possession?
operation. While it is true that Section 8614 of Republic Act No. 9165
requires the National Bureau of Investigation, PNP and the Bureau of
A: Yes, sir.
Customs to maintain "close coordination with the PDEA on all drug-
related matters," the provision does not, by so saying, make PDEA's
participation a condition sine qua non for every buy-bust operation. Q: Were not ₱200 of the ₱250.00 was thrown to the ground
After all, a buy-bust is just a form of an in flagrante arrest sanctioned during the time you were arrested by the police?
by Section 5, Rule 11315 of the Rules of the Court, which police
authorities may rightfully resort to in apprehending violators of Republic
A: No, sir.
Act No. 9165 in support of the PDEA.16 A buy-bust operation is not
invalidated by mere non-coordination with the PDEA.
Q: It was taken from your possession?
Neither is the lack of prior surveillance fatal. The case of People v.
Lacbanes17 is quite instructive: A: Yes, sir.
 Q: And when the policemen brought you to the crime A: We informed the suspect that we are the police officers
laboratory and had your hands tested for ultra-violet and he has this [constitutional] rights and immediately
fluorescent powder, your hands tested positively for the handcuffed him.
presence of the said powder?
Q: Where were the marked moneys?
A: Yes, sir.23
A: The marked moneys were thrown on the ground. After we
Incidentally, the defenses of denial and frame-up have been invariably handcuffed the suspect, we did not immediately searched in.
viewed by this Court with disfavor for it can easily be concocted and is We called the attention of the barangay officials to witness
a common and standard defense ploy in prosecutions for violation of the search of the suspect.
the Dangerous Drugs Act. In order to prosper, the defenses of denial
and frame-up must be proved with strong and convincing evidence.24
xxxx

Another contention raised by the appellant is the failure of the

Q: Now, before you searched the suspect you requested the
prosecution to show the chain of custody of the recovered dangerous
presence of the barangay officials. Now, when these
drug. According to him, while it was Inspector Ferdinand B. Dacillo who
barangay officials were present, what did you do on the
signed the request for laboratory examination, only police officers Pajo
suspect?
and Simon were present in the buy-bust operation.

A: We immediately searched the suspect.

Section 21 of RA 9165 reads:

Q: What was the result of the searched for him? (sic)

SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized, and/or
Surrendered Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs,
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, A: We confiscated one big sachet of suspected shabu and
Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. – The PDEA the retrieval of 2 pieces of ₱100.00 peso bills as marked
shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant moneys.
sources of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential
chemicals, as well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
Q: You said the suspect threw the marked moneys when you
equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered, for proper
searched him, where were the marked moneys?
disposition in the following manner:

A: On the ground.
(1) The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the
drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically
inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or Q: Who picked these marked moneys?
the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or
his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the media and
the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected public official who A: I was the one who picked the marked moneys.
shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a
copy thereof. Q: And then after you had picked the marked moneys and
after you had the 2 pieces of sachets of shabu; one during
Non-compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust team with Section 21 is the buy-bust and the other one during the search, what did
not fatal as long as there is justifiable ground therefor, and as long as you do [with] these 2 pieces of sachets of shabu and the
the integrity and the evidentiary value of the confiscated/seized items marked moneys?
are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team. 25 Its non-
compliance will not render an accused’s arrest illegal or the items A: I recorded those items recovered, sir, during the search to
seized/confiscated from him inadmissible.26 What is of utmost the Certificate of Inventory.28
importance is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value
of the seized items, as the same would be utilized in the determination
of the guilt or innocence of the accused.27 In this particular case, it is As ruled by this Court, what is crucial in the chain of custody is the
undisputed that police officers Pajo and Simon were members of the marking of the confiscated item which, in the present case, was
buy-bust operation team. The fact that it was Inspector Ferdinand B. complied with, thus:
Dacillo who signed the letter-request for laboratory examination does
not in any way affect the integrity of the items confiscated. All the Crucial in proving chain of custody is the marking29 of the seized drugs
requirements for the proper chain of custody had been observed. As or other related items immediately after they are seized from the
testified to by PO2 Pajo regarding the procedure undertaken after the accused. Marking after seizure is the starting point in the custodial link,
consummation of the buy-bust operation: thus, it is vital that the seized contraband are immediately marked
because succeeding handlers of the specimens will use the markings
Prosecutor as reference. The marking of the evidence serves to separate the
marked evidence from the corpus of all other similar or related
evidence from the time they are seized from the accused until they are
Q: What did you do next after that? disposed of at the end of criminal proceedings, obviating switching,
"planting," or contamination of evidence.30
A: After examining the sachet of shabu that it was really the
plastic containing white [crystalline] in substance, we Anent the age of the appellant when he was arrested, this Court finds it
immediately approached the suspect. appropriate to discuss the effect of his minority in his suspension of
sentence. The appellant was seventeen (17) years old when the buy-
xxxx bust operation took place or when the said offense was committed, but
was no longer a minor at the time of the promulgation of the RTC's
Decision.
Q: When you rushed up to the suspect, what did you do?
It must be noted that RA 9344 took effect on May 20, 2006, while the
RTC promulgated its decision on this case on September 14, 2005,
when said appellant was no longer a minor. The RTC did not suspend
the sentence in accordance with Article 192 of P.D. 603, The Child and Nevertheless, the appellant shall be entitled to appropriate disposition
Youth Welfare Code31 and Section 32 of A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, under Section 51 of RA No. 9344, which provides for the confinement
the Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law, 32 the laws that were of convicted children as follows:35
applicable at the time of the promulgation of judgment, because the
imposable penalty for violation of Section 5 of RA 9165 is life
SEC. 51. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and
imprisonment to death.
other Training Facilities. - A child in conflict with the law may, after
conviction and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
It may be argued that the appellant should have been entitled to a sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution, in an
suspension of his sentence under Sections 38 and 68 of RA 9344 agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established,
which provide for its retroactive application, thus: maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in coordination
with the DSWD.
SEC. 38. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. - Once the child who is
under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the In finding the guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the appellant for
offense is found guilty of the offense charged, the court shall determine violation of Section 5 of RA 9165, the RTC imposed the penalty
and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the of reclusion perpetua as mandated in Section 9836 of the same law. A
offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of violation of Section 5 of RA 9165 merits the penalty of life
conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under imprisonment to death; however, in Section 98, it is provided that,
suspended sentence, without need of application: Provided, however, where the offender is a minor, the penalty for acts punishable by life
That suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is imprisonment to death provided in the same law shall be reclusion
already eighteen years (18) of age or more at the time of the perpetua to death. Basically, this means that the penalty can now be
pronouncement of his/her guilt. graduated as it has adopted the technical nomenclature of penalties
provided for in the Revised Penal Code. The said principle was
enunciated by this Court in People v. Simon,37 thus:
Upon suspension of sentence and after considering the various
circumstances of the child, the court shall impose the appropriate
disposition measures as provided in the Supreme Court [Rule] on We are not unaware of cases in the past wherein it was held that, in
Juveniles in Conflict with the Law. imposing the penalty for offenses under special laws, the rules on
mitigating or aggravating circumstances under the Revised Penal Code
cannot and should not be applied. A review of such doctrines as
xxxx
applied in said cases, however, reveals that the reason therefor was
because the special laws involved provided their own specific penalties
Sec. 68. Children Who Have Been Convicted and are Serving for the offenses punished thereunder, and which penalties were not
Sentence. - Persons who have been convicted and are serving taken from or with reference to those in the Revised Penal Code. Since
sentence at the time of the effectivity of this Act, and who were below the penalties then provided by the special laws concerned did not
the age of eighteen (18) years at the time of the commission of the provide for the minimum, medium or maximum periods, it would
offense for which they were convicted and are serving sentence, shall consequently be impossible to consider the aforestated modifying
likewise benefit from the retroactive application of this Act. x x x circumstances whose main function is to determine the period of the
penalty in accordance with the rules in Article 64 of the Code.
However, this Court has already ruled in People v. Sarcia33 that while
Section 38 of RA 9344 provides that suspension of sentence can still This is also the rationale for the holding in previous cases that the
be applied even if the child in conflict with the law is already eighteen provisions of the Code on the graduation of penalties by degrees could
(18) years of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of his/her not be given supplementary application to special laws, since the
guilt, Section 40 of the same law limits the said suspension of sentence penalties in the latter were not components of or contemplated in the
until the child reaches the maximum age of 21. The provision states: scale of penalties provided by Article 71 of the former. The suppletory
effect of the Revised Penal Code to special laws, as provided in Article
10 of the former, cannot be invoked where there is a legal or physical
SEC. 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. - If the impossibility of, or a prohibition in the special law against, such
court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon supplementary application.
the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in
conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the condition of
his/her disposition or rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with The situation, however, is different where although the offense is
the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment. defined in and ostensibly punished under a special law, the penalty
therefor is actually taken from the Revised Penal Code in its technical
nomenclature and, necessarily, with its duration, correlation and legal
If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of effects under the system of penalties native to said Code. When, as in
age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine this case, the law involved speaks of prision correccional, in its
whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order technical sense under the Code, it would consequently be both illogical
execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a and absurd to posit otherwise.
certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum
age of twenty-one (21) years.
xxxx
Hence, the appellant, who is now beyond the age of twenty-one (21)
years can no longer avail of the provisions of Sections 38 and 40 of RA Prefatorily, what ordinarily are involved in the graduation and
9344 as to his suspension of sentence, because such is already moot consequently determine the degree of the penalty, in accordance with
and academic. It is highly noted that this would not have happened if the rules in Article 61 of the Code as applied to the scale of penalties in
the CA, when this case was under its jurisdiction, suspended the Article 71, are the stage of execution of the crime and the nature of the
sentence of the appellant. The records show that the appellant filed his participation of the accused. However, under paragraph 5 of Article 64,
notice of appeal at the age of 19 (2005), hence, when RA 9344 when there are two or more ordinary mitigating circumstances and no
became effective in 2006, appellant was 20 years old, and the case aggravating circumstance, the penalty shall be reduced by one degree.
having been elevated to the CA, the latter should have suspended the Also, the presence of privileged mitigating circumstances, as
sentence of the appellant because he was already entitled to the provided in Articles 67 and 68, can reduce the penalty by one or
provisions of Section 38 of the same law, which now allows the two degrees, or even more. These provisions of Articles 64(5), 67
suspension of sentence of minors regardless of the penalty imposed as and 68 should not apply in toto in the determination of the proper
opposed to the provisions of Article 192 of P.D. 603.34 penalty under the aforestated second paragraph of section 20 of
Republic Act No. 6425, to avoid anomalous results which could not
have been contemplated by the legislature.
Thus, paragraph 5 of Article 61 provides that when the law prescribes
a penalty in some manner not specially provided for in the four
preceding paragraphs thereof, the courts shall proceed by analogy
therewith. Hence, when the penalty prescribed for the crime consists of
one or two penalties to be imposed in their full extent, the penalty next
lower in degree shall likewise consist of as many penalties which follow
the former in the scale in Article 71. If this rule were to be applied, and
since the complex penalty in this case consists of three discrete
penalties in their full extent, that is, prision correccional, prision mayor
and reclusion temporal, then one degree lower would be arresto
menor, destierro and arresto mayor. There could, however, be no
further reduction by still one or two degrees, which must each likewise
consist of three penalties, since only the penalties of fine and public
censure remain in the scale.1avvphi1

The Court rules, therefore, that while modifying circumstances may be

appreciated to determine the periods of the corresponding penalties, or
even reduce the penalty by degrees, in no case should such
graduation of penalties reduce the imposable penalty beyond or lower
than prision correccional. It is for this reason that the three component
penalties in the second paragraph of Section 20 shall each be
considered as an independent principal penalty, and that the lowest
penalty should in any event be prision correccional in order not to
depreciate the seriousness of drug offenses. Interpretatio fienda est ut
res magis valeat quam pereat. Such interpretation is to be adopted so
that the law may continue to have efficacy rather than fail. A perfect
judicial solution cannot be forged from an imperfect law, which impasse
should now be the concern of and is accordingly addressed to
Congress.38

Consequently, the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority39 can

now be appreciated in fixing the penalty that should be imposed. The
RTC, as affirmed by the CA, imposed the penalty of reclusion
perpetua without considering the minority of the appellant. Thus,
applying the rules stated above, the proper penalty should be one
degree lower than reclusion perpetua, which is reclusion temporal, the
privileged mitigating circumstance of minority having been appreciated.
Necessarily, also applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISLAW),
the minimum penalty should be taken from the penalty next lower in
degree which is prision mayor and the maximum penalty shall be taken
from the medium period of reclusion temporal, there being no other
mitigating circumstance nor aggravating circumstance.40 The ISLAW is
applicable in the present case because the penalty which has been
originally an indivisible penalty (reclusion perpetua to death), where
ISLAW is inapplicable, became a divisible penalty (reclusion temporal)
by virtue of the presence of the privileged mitigating circumstance of
minority. Therefore, a penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day
of prision mayor, as minimum, and fourteen (14) years, eight (8)
months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, would be
the proper imposable penalty.

WHEREFORE, the Decision dated July 31, 2008 of the Court of

Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00240-MIN, affirming the
Omnibus Judgment dated September 14, 2005 of the Regional Trial
Court, Branch 1, Butuan City in Criminal Case No. 10250 and Criminal
Case No. 10251, finding appellant Allen Udtojan Mantalaba, guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sections 5 and 11, Article II of
RA 9165 is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the
penalty that should be imposed on appellant's conviction of violation of
Section 5 of RA 9165, is six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor,
as minimum, and fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day
of reclusion temporal, as maximum.

SO ORDERED.
 On arraignment, appellant, with the assistance of counsel de oficio,
pleaded NOT GUILTY6 to the crime charged.

At the pre-trial conference, the prosecution and the defense failed to

make any stipulation of facts. 7 The pre-trial conference was then
terminated and trial on the merits thereafter ensued.

The prosecution presented the following witnesses: (1) AAA, the

private offended party; (2) BBB, mother of AAA; (3) Analiza Pait
(Analiza), neighbor and friend of AAA; (4) Dr. Jesus Emmanuel
Nochete (Dr. Nochete), Medical Officer IV, Northern Samar Provincial
Hospital; and (5) Dr. Vincent Anthony M. Belicena (Dr. Belicena),
Medical Specialist II, Northern SamarProvincial Hospital. Their
testimonies established the following facts:

AAA is a mental retardate and was 12 years and 11 months old at the
time of the rape incident. 8 She and appellant, who was then 17 years
old,9 are neighbors − their respective houses are adjoining each
other.10

In the afternoon of 9 December 2002, AAA and her friend, Analiza,

were in front of the sari-sari store of AAA’s mother, BBB, while
appellant was inside the fence of their house adjacent to the said sari-
sari store. Shortly, thereafter, appellant invited AAA to go with him to
the kiln at the back of their house. AAA acceded and went ahead.11

Upon seeing appellant and AAA going to the kiln, Analiza, pretending
to look for her one peso coin, followed them until she reached a
papaya tree located three and a half meters away from the place.
Analiza hid under the papaya tree and from there she saw appellant
undress AAA by removing the latter’s shorts and panty. Appellant,
however, glanced and saw Analiza. Frightened, Analiza ran away and
went back to the sari-sari store of BBB without telling BBB what she
saw.12

G.R. No. 193507               January 30, 2013 Appellant proceeded to satisfy his bestial desire. After undressing AAA,
appellant made her lie down. He then placed himself on top of AAA
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, and made push and pull movements. Afterwards, appellant stopped,
vs. allowed AAA to sit down for a while and then sent her home.13
REY MONTICALVO y MAGNO, Accused-Appellant.
When AAA arrived at their house around 7:30 p.m., she was asked by
DECISION her mother, BBB, where she came from and why she came home late.
AAA replied that she was at the back of their house as appellant
brought her there and had sexual intercourse with her.14
PEREZ, J.:

The following day, BBB brought AAA to the police station and then to
This is an appeal from the Decision1 of the Court of Appeals in CA- the Northern Samar Provincial Hospital where AAA was examined by
G.R. CR-HC No. 00457 dated 3 December 2009 affirming in toto the Dr. Nochete.15 The medical examination yielded the following:
Decision2 of Branch 19 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Catarman,
Northern Samar, in Criminal Case No. C-3460 dated 18 October 2005
finding herein appellant Rey Monticalvo y Magno guilty beyond The findings are:
reasonable doubt of the crime of rape of a demented person committed
against AAA,3 thereby imposing upon him the penalty of reclusion = Confluent abrasion 1 x 1 inches, 2 inches below the
perpetua and ordering him to pay P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, umbilicus.
P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as exemplary
damages.
Genitalia Exam:
Appellant Rey Monticalvo y Magno was charged with raping AAA in an
Information4 dated 30 April 2003, the accusatory portion of which = Admits 1 finger with ease.
reads:
= (-) vulvar swelling, (-) erythema.
That on or about the 9th day of December 2002 at about 7:00 o’clock
in the evening in Bgy. XXX, Municipality of XXX, Province of XXX, = (+) complete healed hymenal laceration at 5
Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the o’clock, 7 o’clock & 10 o’clock position.
above-named appellant, actuated by lust and with lewd design, with
force and intimidation, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously have carnal knowledge with AAA, 12 years old and is Gram Stain Result: Negative for spermatozoa.16
suffering from mental disorder or is demented or has mental disability,
without the consent and against the will of said victim.5 [Emphasis Dr. Nochete explained that AAA could have possibly sustained those
supplied]. complete healed hymenal lacerations more than a month prior to the
date of the examination. He also clarified that even though AAA has no
fresh hymenal laceration it does not necessarily mean that no sexual
intercourse was committed on her on 9 December 2002. It is possible II.
that AAA did not sustain any fresh hymenal laceration because the
vaginal canal has become loose. He did not also find any trace of
THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO APPRECIATE APPELLANT’S AGE,
spermatozoa on AAA’s vagina, its presence being dependent on
BEING A MINOR, ATTHE TIME OF THE COMMISSION OF THE
whether the appellant did ejaculate or not.17
CRIME.

AAA was also examined by Dr. Belicena, a Psychiatrist at the Northern

III.
Samar Provincial Hospital, who found that AAA is suffering from
moderate to severe mental retardation, meaning, AAA is suffering from
the specific form of below average intelligence that has a low THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO IMPOSE THE PROPER PENALTY.26
reproduction functioning resulting in impaired functioning. This finding
was obtained through mental examination and actual interview of AAA.
The Court of Appeals rendered the assailed Decision on 3 December
Dr. Belicena, however, recommended a full battery of psychological
2009 affirming in toto the trial court’s Decision dated 18 October 2005.
testing to determine AAA’s exact mental age.18 Dr. Belicena’s finding
was reduced into writing as evidenced by a Medical Certificate 19 dated
18 May 2004. Hence, this appeal.

For its part, the defense offered the testimonies of (1) Pio Campos Appellant contends that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond
(Pio), neighbor and friend of appellant; (2) Cesar Monticalvo (Cesar), reasonable doubt as the testimonies of AAA, BBB, Analiza and Dr.
appellant’s father; (3) Alexander Sanico (Alexander), Local Civil Nochete were replete with inconsistencies and improbabilities. Firstly,
Registrar of Bobon, Northern Samar; and (4) appellant, who invoked while the Information stated that appellant raped AAA on or about the
the defense of denial and alibi to exonerate himself from the crime 9th day of December 2002 at around 7:00 p.m., Analiza testified that it
charged. was in the afternoon of the same day when she saw and heard
appellant calling AAA to go to the kiln at the back of their house, and
while she saw appellant undress AAA, she did not actually see the
Appellant denied having raped AAA. He claimed that on 9 December
sexual intercourse because the appellant saw her watching them, so
2002, at around 1:00 p.m., he, together with Pio and a certain Dinnes
she ran away. Secondly, BBB’s testimony that on 9 December 2002,
Samson, was having a drinking spree in the house of one Adolfo
AAA confided to her that she was raped by appellant early that night
Congayao (Adolfo). They finished drinking at around 6:00 p.m. As he
was inconsistent with the testimony of Analiza that it was in the
was too drunk, Pio assisted him in going home. He went to sleep and
afternoon of the same day when she saw appellant and AAA going to
woke up only at 12:00 midnight as he needed to urinate. He went back
the kiln, where the former undressed the latter. Thirdly, Dr. Nochete’s
to sleep and woke up at 6:00 a.m. of the following day, i.e., 10
testimony clearly stated that the hymenal lacerations on AAA’s vagina
December 2002. He was surprised that AAA charged him with rape.
could have possibly been sustained by her a month ago, which does
He was then arrested at around 3:00 p.m. of 10 December 2002.20
not support AAA’s claim of rape on 9 December 2002. Even granting
that appellant, indeed, raped AAA on 9 December 2002, it is highly
Appellant disclosed, however, that the house of Adolfo, where they had implausible that the hymenal lacerations on her vagina were already
their drinking spree, is more or less six (6) meters away from the house completely healed when she was examined by Dr. Nochete on 10
of AAA. In fact, he could still see the house of AAA even when he was December 2002, which was only after less than 24-hours from the date
in the house of Adolfo. He similarly admitted that he knew very well the alleged rape was committed.
that AAA is suffering from mental abnormalities. He also divulged that
he asked Pio to testify on his behalf.21
Appellant also questions the credibility of AAA as a witness given her
condition as a mental retardate. Appellant opines that AAA, could not
Appellant’s testimony was corroborated on all material points by Pio perceive and is not capable of making known her perception to others.
and his father, Cesar, who also admitted that he personally knew AAA As such, she can be easily coached on what to say or do.
as she is their neighbor. Cesar also knew that AAA is suffering from
mental disorder.22 Both Pio and Cesar confirmed that on 9 December
Appellant finally avers that granting arguendo that he is guilty of the
2002, they brought appellant to his bedroom and let him sleep there
crime charged, he was only 17 years old at the time of its commission
because he was too drunk. Thereafter, Pio and Cesar engaged in a
as evidenced by his Certificate of Live Birth. This fact was even
drinking spree inside the latter’s house, particularly at the kitchen that
attested to by the Local Civil Registrar of Bobon, Northern Samar.
is more than two (2) meters away from appellant’s bedroom, which
Given his minority at the time of the commission of the crime charged,
lasted until 11:00 p.m. Pio and Cesar likewise stated that there was no
the court should have considered the same as privileged mitigating
moment that appellant went out of his bedroom since the time they
circumstance in imposing the penalty against him.
brought him there.23

This Court affirms appellant’s conviction.

Alexander, another defense witness, presented appellant’s Certificate
of Live Birth24 to prove that the latter was only 17 years old during the
commission of the crime, i.e., 9 December 2002.25 At the outset, paragraph 1, Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code,
as amended by Republic Act No. 8353, 27 provides for two (2)
circumstances when carnal knowledge of a woman with mental
The trial court, convinced about the merits of the prosecution’s case
disability is considered rape. Subparagraph (b) thereof refers to rape of
rendered a Decision on 18 October 2005, finding the appellant guilty
a person "deprived of reason" while subparagraph (d) refers to rape of
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape of a demented person
a "demented person."28 The term "deprived of reason" has been
and sentenced him to an imprisonment term of reclusion perpetua and
construed to encompass those suffering from mental abnormality,
ordered him to indemnify AAA in the amount of P50,000.00 as civil
deficiency or retardation.29 The term "demented," on the other hand,
indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as
means having dementia, which Webster defines as mental
exemplary damages.
deterioration; also madness, insanity.30 Dementia has also been
defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as a "form of mental disorder in
On appeal, the following errors were assigned: which cognitive and intellectual functions of the mind are prominently
affected; x x x total recovery not possible since cerebral disease is
involved."31 Thus, a mental retardate can be classified as a person
I.
"deprived of reason," not one who is "demented" and carnal knowledge
of a mental retardate is considered rape under subparagraph (b), not
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE subparagraph (d) of Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as
APPELLANT FOR THE CRIME OF RAPE OF A DEMENTED amended.32
PERSON DESPITE THE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO
PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
In this case, both the trial court and the appellate court incorrectly used ART. 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. — Rape is committed.
the word demented to characterize AAA’s mental condition and
mistakenly categorized the rape committed by appellant under
1) By a man who have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
subparagraph (d), Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as
following circumstances:
amended, instead of under subparagraph (b) thereof. Nonetheless, the
mistake would not exonerate appellant. Otherwise stated, his
conviction or criminal liability for rape stands though not under a) Through force, threat or intimidation;
subparagraph (d) of Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, but under subparagraph (b) thereof.
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious;
Neither can it be said that appellant’s right to be properly informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation against him was violated. This
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
Court is not unaware that the Information was worded, as follows:
authority; and
"AAA is suffering from mental disorder or is demented or has mental
disability." This fact, however, will not render the Information defective
and will not bar this Court from convicting appellant under d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age
subparagraph (b) of Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as or is demented, even though none of the circumstances
amended. mentioned above be present.[Emphasis supplied].

In Olivarez v. Court of Appeals,33 this Court pronounced that: From the foregoing, for the charge of rape to prosper, the prosecution
must prove that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman
through any of the four enumerated circumstances. Without doubt,
x x x In People v. Rosare, 34 the information did not allege that the
carnal knowledge of a woman who is a mental retardate is rape under
victim was a mental retardate which is an essential element of the
the aforesaid provisions of law. Proof of force or intimidation is not
crime of statutory rape. This Court however sustained the trial court’s
necessary, as a mental retardate is not capable of giving consent to a
judgment of conviction holding that the resolution of the investigating
sexual act. What needs to be proven are the facts of sexual congress
prosecutor which formed the basis of the information, a copy of which
between the accused and the victim, and the mental retardation of the
is attached thereto, stated that the offended party is suffering from
latter.43
mental retardation. It ruled that there was substantial compliance with
the mandate that an accused be informed of the nature of the charge
against him. Thus: In People v. Dalandas,44 citing People v. Dumanon,45 this Court held
that mental retardation can be proven by evidence other than
medical/clinical evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses and even
Appellant contends that he cannot be convicted of statutory rape
the observation by the trial court.46
because the fact that the victim was a mental retardate was never
alleged in the information and, absent this element, the acts charged
negate the commission of the offense for which he was convicted by In the present case, the prosecution was able to establish that AAA is,
the lower court. indeed, a mental retardate through, (1) the testimony of her mother; (2)
the trial court’s observation; and (3) the mental examination and actual
interview of AAA conducted by Dr. Belicena, a Psychiatrist at the
Pursuant to Section 8, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, we have
Northern Samar Provincial Hospital, who found AAA to be suffering
decided to motu proprio take cognizance of the resolution issued by
from moderate to severe mental retardation, meaning, AAA is suffering
the investigating prosecutor in I.S. No. 92-0197 dated June 2, 1992,
from the "specific form of below average intelligence which has a low
which formed the basis of and a copy of which was attached to the
reproduction functioning which result to impairment functioning."47 It is
information for rape filed against herein appellant. Therein, it is clearly
also worthy to note that the defense did not dispute, even admitted the
stated that the offended party is suffering from mental retardation. We
fact that AAA is suffering from mental retardation. The findings of the
hold, therefore, that this should be deemed a substantial compliance
lower courts about AAA’s mental condition must be upheld.
with the constitutional mandate that an accused be informed of the
nature of the charge against him x x x (citation omitted). 35 [Emphasis
supplied]. The prosecution was also able to establish the fact of sexual congress
between appellant and AAA. Despite the latter’s mental condition, she
narrated before the court in the best way she could her ordeal in the
In this case, both the Complaint36 and the Resolution 37 of the
hands of appellant. As stated by the appellate court, AAA conveyed
Municipal Trial Court of Northern Samar, which formed the basis of the
her ideas by words and demonstrations. 48 AAA recounted how the
Information and copies of which were attached in the records, stated
appellant sexually abused her on 9 December 2002 by inviting her to
that AAA is suffering from mental abnormalities – she looked like a
go to the kiln at the back of their house. Thereupon, appellant suddenly
retardate and her focus is not normal. Even, the Resolution 38 of the
undressed her by removing her shorts and panty. This fact was
Acting Provincial Prosecutor concurred with the aforesaid findings.
attested to by Analiza, one of the prosecution witnesses, who actually
From the aforesaid, it can be gleaned that AAA’s mental disorder or
witnessed appellant undressing AAA by removing the latter’s shorts
mental disability is that of being a mentally retarded and not demented.
and panty. AAA further testified that after undressing her, appellant
Thus, there was substantial compliance with the mandate to inform the
made her lie down, placed himself on top of her and made push and
accused of the nature of the accusation.39 More so, as discussed
pull movements. Thereafter, appellant stopped, made her sit down and
hereunder, the prosecution was able to prove that AAA is, indeed, a
sent her home.49 This testimony of AAA was correctly found by the trial
mental retardate. Even the appellant affirmed the said mental condition
court and the appellate court as coherent and given in a detailed
of the victim.
manner.50

To repeat, the term "deprived of reason" has been construed to

Emphasis must be given to the fact that the competence and credibility
encompass those suffering from mental abnormality, deficiency or
of mentally deficient rape victims as witnesses have been upheld by
retardation.40 Hence, carnal knowledge of a mental retardate is rape
this Court where it is shown that they can communicate their ordeal
under subparagraph (b) not subparagraph (d) of Article 266-A(1) of the
capably and consistently. Rather than undermine the gravity of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended.41
complainant’s accusations, it even lends greater credence to her
testimony, that, someone as feeble-minded and guileless could speak
The gravamen of the crime of rape under Art. 266-A(1) is sexual so tenaciously and explicitly on the details of the rape if she has not in
intercourse with a woman against her will or without her fact suffered such crime at the hands of the accused. Moreover, it has
consent.42 Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, been jurisprudentially settled that when a woman says she has been
specifically states that: raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that she has
been raped and her testimony alone is sufficient if it satisfies the
exacting standard of credibility needed to convict the accused.51
Worth stressing also is the fact that during AAA’s testimony, she another place at the time of its commission, it is likewise essential that
positively identified the appellant as the person who raped her. 52 Thus, he show physical impossibility for him to be at the locus delicti,64 which
the straightforward narration of AAA of what transpired, accompanied the appellant in this case failed to do.
by her categorical identification of appellant as the malefactor, sealed
the case for the prosecution.53
As aptly observed by the trial court:

The allegation of inconsistencies in the testimonies of AAA, BBB,

The houses of the offended party and the appellant are only divided by
Analiza and Dr. Nochete as regards the exact date and time the
a fence and the place of the incident is only at the back of the house of
alleged rape incident happened, as well as the absence of fresh
the appellant. The defense of alibi must fail. In addition to the positive
hymenal lacerations on AAA’s vagina, pointed to by appellant cannot
identification made by AAA and the place of the incident is adjacent to
work in his favor.
the houses of the victim and the appellant, being neighbors, the fact
that the appellant alleged that he was having drinking spree at that
Evidently, these inconsistencies refer only to trivial and inconsequential time and that he was dead drunk at around 6:00 p.m. of that date,
matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of there is no impossibility for the appellant to be physically present at the
rape.54 A witness is not expected to remember with perfect recollection scene of the incident, because of its proximity.
every minute detail of her harrowing experience. A minor mistake as to
the exact time of the commission of the rape is immaterial and cannot
Corroborative testimony is not credible if tainted with bias particularly in
discredit the testimony of a witness. This Court has repeatedly held
cases where the witnesses are closely associated to the appellant as
that the exact date of the commission of the rape is not an essential
to be interested in the appellant’s acquittal. In this case, the appellant’s
element of the crime.55 Indeed, the precise time of the crime has no
witnesses are his alleged drinking buddy and his father. Considering
substantial bearing on its commission.56 What is decisive in a rape
that they are bound by friendship and affiliation, it is conceivable that
charge is that the commission of the rape by the accused against the
they would be inclined to make excuses for him appellant from
complainant has been sufficiently proven. Inconsistencies and
culpability.65
discrepancies as to minor matters which are irrelevant to the elements
of the crime cannot be considered grounds for acquittal.57
All told, appellant’s guilt has been proven by the prosecution beyond
reasonable doubt, thus, his conviction stands.
In the same way, the absence of fresh hymenal lacerations and
spermatozoa on AAA’s vagina do not negate the fact of rape. A freshly
broken hymen, as well as the presence or absence of spermatozoa, is As to penalty. Under Article 266-B66 in relation to Article 266-A(1) of the
not also an essential element of rape.58 As clarified by Dr. Nochete, the Revised Penal Code, as amended, simple rape is punishable by
absence of fresh hymenal laceration on AAA’s vagina does not reclusion perpetua. However, when rape is committed by an assailant
necessarily mean that she did not engage in sexual intercourse on 9 who has knowledge of the victim’s mental retardation, the penalty is
December 2002. Possibly, AAA did not sustain any fresh hymenal increased to death. But this circumstance must be alleged in the
laceration as her vaginal canal had become loose. And, he did not find information being a qualifying circumstance which increases the
any trace of spermatozoa because its presence depends on whether or penalty to death and changes the nature of the offense from simple to
not the appellant ejaculated. qualified rape.67 In the case at bench, while appellant categorically
admitted that he knew AAA to be suffering from mental abnormalities,
the prosecution failed to allege this fact in the information. As such,
Indeed, a mental retardate is not, by reason of such handicap alone,
even if it was proved, it cannot be appreciated as a qualifying
be disqualified from testifying in court. 59 Mental retardation per se does
circumstance. Thus, appellant’s conviction is only for simple rape for
not affect credibility. A mentally retarded may be a credible witness.
which he should be meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
The acceptance of her testimony depends on the quality of her
perceptions and the manner she can make them known to the
court.60 If the testimony of a mental retardate is coherent, the same is Nonetheless, a reasonable ground exists in this case that calls for the
admissible in court.61 modification of the penaltyof reclusion perpetua imposed by both lower
courts upon the appellant.
Neither can it be said that AAA was merely coached as a witness by
her mother. It is highly unthinkable that a mother would draw her This Court finds merit in appellant’s assertion that he was a minor
daughter, a mental retardate at that, into a rape story with all its during the commission of the crime charged. During trial, upon order of
attendant scandal and humiliation if the rape did not really happen. No the trial court, the Local Civil Registrar of Bobon, Northern Samar,
mother in her right mind would possibly wish to stamp her child with the brought before it their office records, particularly appellant’s Certificate
stigma that follows the despicable crime of rape. 62 Moreover, appellant of Live
failed to show any ill-motive on the part of AAA and her mother to
falsely testify against him.
Birth containing the fact of birth of the latter. Appellant’s Certificate of
Live Birth shows that he was born on 23 February 1985. Indeed, at the
In light of the straightforward and credible testimony of AAA, her time of the commission of the crime charged on 9 December 2002,
positive identification of appellant as her assailant and the lack of ill- appellant was only 17 years old, a minor. Thus, he is entitled to the
motive on her part to falsely testify against appellant, the latter’s privileged mitigating circumstance of minority pursuant to Article 68(2)
defense of denial and alibi must necessarily fail. of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,68 which specifically states
that:
Denial is an inherently weak defense and has always been viewed
upon with disfavor by the courts due to the ease with which it can be ART. 68. – Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years
concocted. Denial as a defense crumbles in the light of positive of age. – When the offender is a minor under eighteen years and his
identification of the accused, as in this case. The defense of denial case is one coming under the provisions of the paragraph next to the
assumes significance only when the prosecution’s evidence is such last of article 80 of this Code, the following rules shall be observed:
that it does not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Verily, mere
denial, unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is negative
xxxx
self-serving evidence which cannot be given greater evidentiary weight
than the testimony of the complaining witness who testified on
affirmative matters.63 2. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the
penalty next lower than that prescribed by the law shall be imposed,
but always in the proper period.69 [Emphasis supplied].
Like denial, alibi is not looked upon with favor by the trial court. It also
cannot prevail over witnesses’ positive identification of appellant as the
perpetrator of the crime. In any event, for the defense of alibi to Applying the privileged mitigating circumstance, the proper imposable
prosper, it is not enough that the accused can prove his presence at penalty upon appellant is reclusion temporal, being the penalty next
lower to reclusion perpetua - the penalty prescribed by law for simple whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order
rape. Being a divisible penalty, the Indeterminate Sentence Law is execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a
applicable.70 certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of
twenty-one (21) years. [Emphasis supplied].
Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, appellant can be sentenced
to an indeterminate penalty the minimum of which shall be within the At present, appellant is already 27 years of age, and the judgment of
range of prision mayor (the penalty next lower in degree to reclusion the trial court was promulgated prior to the effectivity of Republic Act
temporal), that is 6 years and 1 day to 12 years, and maximum of No. 9344. Therefore, the application of Sections 38 and 40 of the said
which shall be within the range of reclusion temporal in its medium law is already moot and academic.
period (there being no other modifying circumstances attendant to the
crime), that is 14 years, 8 months and 1 day to 17 years and 4
Be that as it may, to give meaning to the legislative intent of Republic
months.71 With that, the indeterminate penalty of 10 years of prision
Act No. 9344, the promotion of the welfare of a child in conflict with the
mayor, as minimum, to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal,
law should extend even to one who has exceeded the age limit of 21
as maximum, should be imposed upon the appellant. However, the
years, so long as he/she committed the crime when he/she was still a
case of appellant does not, as it normally should, end at this point. On
child. The offender shall be entitled to the right to restoration,
20 May 2006, Republic Act No. 9344, otherwise known as the
rehabilitation and reintegration in accordance with Republic Act No.
"Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006," took effect. Section 68
9344 in order that he/she is given the chance to live a normal life and
thereof specifically provides for its retroactive application, thus:72
become a productive member of the community. The age of the child in
conflict with the law at the time of the promulgation of the judgment of
SEC. 68. Children Who Have Been Convicted and are Serving conviction is not material. What matters is that the offender committed
Sentence. – Persons who have been convicted and are serving the offense when he/she was still of tender age.76 The appellant,
sentence at the time of the effectivity of this Act, and who were below therefore, shall be entitled to appropriate disposition under Section 51
the age of eighteen (18) years at the time of the commission of the of Republic Act No. 9344, which provides for the confinement of
offense for which they were convicted and are serving sentence, shall convicted children as follows:77
likewise benefit from the retroactive application of this Act. They shall
be entitled to appropriate dispositions provided under this Act and their
SEC. 51. Confinement of Convicted Children in Agricultural Camps and
sentences shall be adjusted accordingly. They shall be immediately
Other Training Facilities. – A child in conflict with the law may, after
released if they are so qualified under this Act or other applicable law.
conviction and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
[Emphasis supplied].
sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal institution, in an
agricultural camp and other training facilities that may be established,
Clearly, Republic Act No. 9344 is applicable in this case even though maintained, supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in coordination
the crime was committed four (4) years prior to its enactment and with the DSWD.
effectivity. Parenthetically, with more reason should Republic Act No.
9344 apply to this case as the 2005 conviction by the lower courts was
To conform to this Court’s ruling in People v.Sarcia, 78 the case shall be
still under review when the law took effect in 2006.73
remanded to the court of origin to effect appellant’s confinement in an
agricultrual camp or other training facility.79
Section 38 of Republic Act No. 9344 warrants the suspension of
sentence of a child in conflict with the law notwithstanding that he/she
As to damages. The civil liability resulting from the commission of the
has reached the age of majority at the time the judgment of conviction
offense is not affected by the appropriate disposition measures and
is pronounced.74 It reads, thus:
shall be enforced in accordance with law.80 This Court affirms both the
civil indemnity of P50,000.00 and moral damages of P50,000.00
SEC. 38. Automatic Suspension of Sentence. – Once the child who is awarded by the lower courts in favor of AAA. Civil indemnity, which is
under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the actually in the nature of actual or compensatory damages, is
offense is found guilty of the offense charged, the court shall determine mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape. Case law also requires
and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the automatic award of moral damages to a rape victim without need of
offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of proof because from the nature of the crime, it can be assumed that she
conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such award. Such award is
suspended sentence, without need of application: Provided, however, separate and distinct from civil indemnity.81
That suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is
already eighteen (18) of age or more at the time of the pronouncement
In consonance with prevailing jurisprudence on simple rape wherein
of his/her guilt.
exemplary damages are awarded to set a public example and to
protect hapless individuals from sexual molestation, this Court likewise
Upon suspension of sentence and after considering the various affirms the lower courts award of exemplary damages but increased
circumstances of the child, the court shall impose the appropriate the same from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 to conform to recent
disposition measures as provided in the Supreme Court Rule on jurisprudence.82
Juveniles in Conflict with the Law. [Emphasis supplied].
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision of the Court of
However, while Section 38 of Republic Act No. 9344 provides that Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00457 dated 3 December 2009 is
suspension of sentence can still be applied even if the child in conflict hereby MODIFIED as follows: (I) appellant is found guilty of rape under
with the law is already eighteen (18) years of age or more at the time of subparagraph (b) of Article 266-A( I) of the Revised Penal Code, as
the pronouncement of his/her guilt, Section 40 of the same law limits amended, and not under subparagraph (d) thereof; (2) in view of the
the said suspension of sentence until the said child reaches the privileged mitigating circumstance appreciated in favor of appellant the
maximum age of 21, thus:75 penalty of reclusion perpetua is reduced to reclusion temporal and
being a divisible penalty, the Indeterminate Sentence Law applies and
the indeterminate penalty of I 0 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to
SEC. 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court. – If the
17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal, as maximum, is imposed
court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon
upon the appellant; and (3) the amount of exemplary damages
the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in
awarded by the lower courts is increased from P25,000.00 to
conflict with the law has willfully failed to comply with the conditions of
P30,000.00. The award of civil indemnity and moral damages both in
his/her disposition or rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with
the amount of P50,000.00 are maintained. This case, however, shall
the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment.
be REMANDED to the court a quo for appropriate disposition in
accordance with Section 51 of Republic Act No. 9344.
If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of
age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine
SO ORDERED.
 Perpenian y Rafon guilty beyond reasonable doubt of kidnapping for
ransom as defined and penalized under Article 267 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7659.

The accused-appellants, along with an unidentified person, were

charged under the criminal information3 which reads:

Criminal Case No. 98-0928

For Kidnapping for Ransom as amended by RA 7659

That on August 12, 1998 at around 7:30 o’clock in the evening at No.
118 FB Harrison Pasay City and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above named-accused conspiring, confederating
and mutually helping one another and grouping themselves together,
did then and there by force and intimidation, and the use of high
powered firearms, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, carry away
and deprive Lucia Chan y Lee of her liberty against her will for the
purpose of extorting ransom as in fact a demand for ransom was made
as a condition for her release amounting to FOUR HUNDRED
THOUSAND PESOS (₱400,000.00) to the damage and prejudice of
Lucia L. Chan in the said amount and such other amounts as may be
awarded to her under the provisions of the Civil Code.

The antecedent facts were culled from the records of the case:4

Lucia Chan (Chan) was a fish dealer based in Manila. She usually
expected fish deliveries, which were shipped by her suppliers from the
provinces. Sometime in the afternoon of 11 August 1998, two persons,
one of whom was identified as Theng Dilangalen (Dilangalen), went to
Chan’s residence at FB Harrison St., Pasay City to inquire about a
certain passport alleged to have been mistakenly placed inside a box
of fish to be delivered to her. Unable to locate said passport, the two
left. The next morning, Dilangalen, together with another companion
identified as Tony Abao (Abao), returned looking for Chan but were
told that she was out. When the two returned in the afternoon, Chan
informed them that the fish delivery had yet to arrive. Chan offered
instead to accompany them to the airport to retrieve the box of fish
allegedly containing the passport. Dilangalen and Abao declined and
told Chan that they would be back later that evening.5

Dilangalen, accompanied by an unidentified person who remains at

large, returned to Chan’s residence that evening. Chan’s houseboy
ushered them in and Chan met them by the stairs. 6 Thereat, the
unidentified companion of Dilangalen pointed his gun at Chan’s son,
Levy Chan (Levy), and the house companions. 7 As the unidentified
man forcibly dragged Chan, her son Levy tried to stop the man by
grabbing his mother’s feet. Seeing this, Dilangalen pointed his gun at
Levy’s head forcing the latter to release his grip on Chan’s feet. 8 Levy
G.R. No. 172707               October 1, 2013 thereafter proceeded to the Pasay Police Headquarters to report the
incident.9

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,

vs. Chan was forced to board a "Tamaraw FX" van. 10 After travelling for
HALIL GAMBAO Y ESMAIL, EDDIE KARIM Y USO, EDWIN about two hours, the group stopped at a certain house. Accused-
DUKILMAN Y SUBOH, TONY ABAO Y SULA, RAUL UDAL Y appellant Edwin Dukilman (Dukilman) warned Chan not to shout as he
KAGUI, THENG DILANGALEN Y NANDING, JAMAN MACALINBOL had his gun pointed at her mouth. Chan was ordered to go with two
Y KATOL, MONETTE RONAS Y AMPIL, NORA EVAD Y MULOK, women,11 later identified in court by Chan as appellants Monette Ronas
THIAN PERPENIAN Y RAFON A.K.A LARINA PERPENIAN AND (Ronas) and Nora Evad (Evad).12 Chan was brought inside a house
JOHN DOES, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS. and was made to lie down on a bed, guarded by Ronas, Evad,
Dukilman and Jaman Macalinbol (Macalinbol).13 Ronas and Evad
threatened Chan that she would be killed unless she paid 20 Million
DECISION Pesos.14

PEREZ, J.: On 13 August 1998, Chan was awakened by Evad and was asked to
board the "Tamaraw FX" van. After travelling for about ten minutes, the
Before this Court for Automatic Review is the Decision 1 dated 28 June van stopped and the group alighted. Chan was brought to a room on
2005 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00863, the second floor of the house. Inside the room were three persons
which affirmed with modification the Decision 2 of the Regional Trial whom Chan identified in court as Macalinbol, Raul Udal (Udal) and
Court (RTC) of Pasay City, Branch 109 dated 16 October 1998, finding Halil Gambao (Gambao).15 Another woman, later identified as Thian
accused-appellants Halil Gambao y Esmail, Eddie Karim y Uso, Edwin Perpenian (Perpenian), arrived.16 At about 9:00 o’clock in the evening,
Dukilman y Suboh, Tony Abao y Sula, Raul Udal y Kagui, Teng a man who was later identified as Teng Mandao (Mandao), entered the
Mandao y Haron, Theng Dilangalen y Nanding, Jaman Macalinbol y room with a handgun and asked Chan "Bakit kayo nagsumbong sa
Katol, Monette Ronas y Ampil, Nora Evad y Mulok and Thian pulis?"17 Another man, whom Chan identified in court as Eddie Karim
(Karim), ordered Mandao out of the room. Karim informed Chan that he WHEREFORE, the decision of the court a quo finding accused-
was sent by their boss to ask her how much money she has. 18 Chan appellants HALIL GAMBAO y ESMAIL, EDDIE KARIM y USO, EDWIN
was instructed to talk to her son through a cell phone and she gave DUKILMAN y SUBOH, TONY ABAO y SULA, RAUL UDAL y KAGUI,
instructions to her son to get the ₱75, 000.00 she kept in her TENG MANDAO y HARON, THENG DILANGALEN y NANDING,
cabinet.19 The group then talked to Chan’s son and negotiated the JAMAN MACALINBOL y KATOL, MONETTE RONAS y AMPIL and
ransom amount in exchange for his mother’s release. It was agreed NORA EVAD y MULOK guilty beyond reasonable doubt of kidnapping
upon that Levy was to deliver ₱400,000.00 at the "Chowking" for ransom defined and penalized under Article 267 of the Revised
Restaurant at Buendia Avenue.20 Penal Code, as amended by RA 7659 and imposing upon each of
them the supreme penalty of death is AFFIRMED WITH
MODIFICATION that each of them is ordered to pay jointly and
Inspectors Narciso Ouano, Jr. (Inspector Ouano) and Cesar Mancao
severally the victim in the amount of ₱50,000.00 by way of moral
(Inspector Mancao), who were assigned at the Pasay City area to
damages.
conduct the investigation regarding the kidnapping, were informed that
the abductors called and demanded for ransom in exchange for Chan’s
release.21 During their surveillance the following day, Inspectors Ouano It appearing that accused-appellant THIAN PERPENIAN y RAFON
and Mancao observed a Red Transport taxicab entering the route was only 17 years old at the time of the commission of the crime, she
which led to the victim’s residence. The inspectors observed that the is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.29
occupants of the taxicab kept on looking at the second floor of the
house. The inspectors and their team tailed the taxicab until Pansol,
Pursuant to Section 13, Rule 124 as amended by Administrative Matter
Calamba, Laguna, where it entered the Elizabeth Resort and stopped
No. 00-5-03-SC, the appellate court certified the case to this Court and
in front of Cottage 1. Convinced that the woman the team saw in the
accordingly ordered the elevation of the records.
cottage was the victim, they sought clearance from Philippine Anti
Organized Crime Task Force (PAOCTF) to conduct a rescue
operation.22 In a Resolution30 dated 20 June 2006, we required the parties to file
their respective supplemental briefs. The issues raised by the accused-
appellants in their respective briefs, supplemental briefs and
On 14 August 1998, P/Insp. Vicente Arnado (Inspector Arnado)
manifestations will be discussed collectively.
received information that the abductors acceded to a ₱400,000.00
ransom money to be delivered at "Chowking" Restaurant at Buendia
Avenue at around 2:00 am. Upon learning of the information, the team Insufficiency of Evidence
immediately and strategically positioned themselves around the vicinity
of the restaurant. At about 2:00 am, a light blue "Tamaraw FX" van with
Accused-appellants Dukilman, Ronas, Evad would have this Court
4 people on board arrived. The four took the ransom money and
believe that the witness, Chan, was not able to positively identify them
headed towards the South Luzon Expressway. The surveillance team
because of her failing eyesight due to old age.
successfully intercepted the van and arrested the 4 men, later
identified in court as Karim, Abao, Gambao and Dukilman. The team
was also able to recover the ₱400,000.00 ransom.23 This argument is bereft of merit. We note that both the trial court and
the CA found Chan’s testimony credible and straightforward. During
her testimony, she positively identified the accused-appellants. If she
At about 5:00 o’clock in the morning of the same day, the police team
had not met them before, she could not have positively identified them
assaulted Cottage No. 1, resulting in the safe rescue of Chan and the
in open court. In fact, the participation of these accused-appellants was
apprehension of seven of her abductors, later identified in court as
further established through the testimonies of the other prosecution
Dilangalen, Udal, Macalinbol, Mandao, Perpenian, Evad and Ronas.24
witnesses.

During the 7 October 1998 hearing, after the victim and her son
Time and again, this Court has maintained that the question of
testified, Karim manifested his desire to change his earlier plea of "not
credibility of witnesses is primarily for the trial court to determine. For
guilty" to "guilty." The presiding judge then explained the
this reason, its observations and conclusions are accorded great
consequences of a change of plea, stating: "It would mean the moment
respect on appeal. They are conclusive and binding unless shown to
you withdraw your previous pleas of not guilty and enter a plea of
be tainted with arbitrariness or unless, through oversight, some fact or
guilty, the court of course, after receiving evidence, as in fact it has
circumstance of weight and influence has not been considered. 31 In
received the testimonies of [the] two witnesses, will [outrightly]
People v. Tañedo,32 this Court had occasion to reiterate the ruling that
sentence you to the penalty provided by law after the prosecution shall
findings of fact of the trial court pertaining to the credibility of witnesses
have finished the presentation of its evidence. Now that I have
command great respect since it had the opportunity to observe their
explained to you the consequences of your entering a plea of guilty,
demeanor while they testified in court. 33 It can be observed that the
are you still desirous of entering a plea of ‘guilty’?" Eddie Karim
briefs submitted by the accused-appellants are replete with generalities
answered, "Yes."25 On hearing this clarification, the other appellants
and wanting in relevant particulars. It is for this reason that we are
likewise manifested, through their counsel who had earlier conferred
giving full credence to the findings of the trial court regarding the
with them and explained to each of them the consequences of a
credibility of witness Chan.
change of plea, their desire to change the pleas they entered. The trial
court separately asked each of the appellants namely: Gambao, Abao,
Udal, Mandao, Dilangalen, Macalinbol, Ronas and Evad if they Perpenian likewise argued that the evidence for her conviction is
understood the consequence of changing their pleas. All of them insufficient. We also find her argument bereft of merit.
answered in the affirmative.26 Similarly, Dukilman manifested his desire
to change his plea and assured the trial court that he understood the
consequences of such change of plea. 27 Thereupon, the trial court The testimony of Inspector Ouano, establishing Perpenian as one of
ordered their re-arraignment. After they pleaded guilty,28 the trial court the seven people apprehended when they conducted the rescue
directed the prosecution to present evidence, which it did. operation at around 5:00 o’clock in the morning of 14 August
1998,34 and the positive identification of Perpenian by Chan constituted
adequate evidence working against her defense of denial.
On 16 October 1998, the RTC rendered a decision convicting Gambao,
Karim, Dukilman, Abao, Udal, Mandao, Dilangalen, Macalinbol, Ronas,
Evad and Perpenian of Kidnapping for Ransom. Hence, they appealed Further, it should be noted that the only defense the accused-
to the CA. appellants proffered was denial. It is established jurisprudence that
denial cannot prevail over the witnesses’ positive identification of the
accused-appellants, more so where the defense did not present
In a Decision dated 28 June 2005, the appellate court affirmed with convincing evidence that it was physically impossible for them to have
modifications the decision of the trial court. The dispositive portion of been present at the crime scene at the time of the commission of the
the CA decision reads: crime.35
The foregoing considered, the positive identification by Chan, the Ask the defense counsel a series of questions as to whether he had
relevant testimonies of witnesses and the absence of evidence other conferred with, and completely explained to, the accused the meaning
than mere denial proffered by the defense lead this Court to give due and consequences of a plea of guilty.
weight to the findings of the lower courts.
Elicit information about the personality profile of the accused, such as
Improvident Plea his age, socio-economic status, and educational background, which
may serve as a trustworthy index of his capacity to give a free and
informed plea of guilty.
As provided for by Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended
by RA 7659, the penalty for kidnapping for ransom is death. A review
of the records36 shows that on 7 October 1998, the accused-appellants Inform the accused the exact length of imprisonment or nature of the
withdrew their plea of "not guilty" and were re-arraigned. They penalty under the law and the certainty that he will serve such
subsequently entered pleas of "guilty" to the crime of kidnapping for sentence. For not infrequently, an accused pleads guilty in the hope of
ransom, a capital offense. This Court, in People v. Oden, 37 laid down a lenient treatment or upon bad advice or because of promises of the
the duties of the trial court when the accused pleads guilty to a capital authorities or parties of a lighter penalty should he admit guilt or
offense. The trial court is mandated: express remorse. It is the duty of the judge to ensure that the accused
does not labor under these mistaken impressions because a plea of
guilty carries with it not only the admission of authorship of the crime
(1)
proper but also of the aggravating circumstances attending it, that
increase punishment.
to conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of the plea of guilt,
Inquire if the accused knows the crime with which he is charged and
fully explain to him the elements of the crime which is the basis of his
(2) indictment. Failure of the court to do so would constitute a violation of
his fundamental right to be informed of the precise nature of the
accusation against him and a denial of his right to due process.
to require the prosecution to still prove the guilt of the accused and the
precise degree of his culpability, and
All questions posed to the accused should be in a language known and
understood by the latter.
(3)

The trial judge must satisfy himself that the accused, in pleading guilty,
to inquire whether or not the accused wishes to present evidence in his is truly guilty. The accused must be required to narrate the tragedy or
behalf and allow him to do so if he desires.38 reenact the crime or furnish its missing details.

The rationale behind the rule is that the courts must proceed with more It is evident from the records42 that the aforesaid rules have not been
care where the possible punishment is in its severest form, namely fully complied with. The questions propounded by the trial court judge
death, for the reason that the execution of such a sentence is failed to ensure that accused-appellants fully understood the
irreversible. The primordial purpose is to avoid improvident pleas of consequences of their plea. In fact, it is readily apparent from the
guilt on the part of an accused where grave crimes are involved since records43 that Karim had the mistaken assumption that his plea of guilt
he might be admitting his guilt before the court and thus forfeiting his would mitigate the imposable penalty and that both the judge and his
life and liberty without having fully understood the meaning, counsel failed to explain to him that such plea of guilt will not mitigate
significance and consequence of his plea.39 Moreover, the requirement the penalty pursuant to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code. Karim
of taking further evidence would aid this Court on appellate review in was not warned by the trial court judge that in cases where the penalty
determining the propriety or impropriety of the plea.40 is single and indivisible, like death, the penalty is not affected by either
aggravating or mitigating circumstances. The trial court judge’s
Anent the first requisite, the searching inquiry determines whether the seemingly annoyed statement that a conditional plea is not allowed, as
plea of guilt was based on a free and informed judgement. The inquiry provided below, is inadequate:
must focus on the voluntariness of the plea and the full comprehension
of the consequences of the plea. This Court finds no cogent reason for Atty. Ferrer:
deviating from the guidelines provided by jurisprudence 41 and thus,
adopts the same:
Your Honor please, may we be allowed to say something before the
trial. For accused Eddie Karim we manifest and petition this court that
Although there is no definite and concrete rule as to how a trial judge he be allowed to be re-arraigned Your Honor please, considering that
must conduct a "searching inquiry," we have held that the following he will plead guilty as charged but the imposable penalty is lowered,
guidelines should be observed: Your Honor.

Ascertain from the accused himself Court:

(a) how he was brought into the custody of the law; You cannot make a conditional plea of guilty, that is what the law says.
You plead guilty, no condition attached. Conditional plea is not allowed.
(b) whether he had the assistance of a competent counsel
during the custodial and preliminary investigations; and Atty. Ferrer:

(c) under what conditions he was detained and interrogated Considering, Your Honor, accused Eddie Karim is already repenting
during the investigations. This is intended to rule out the
possibility that the accused has been coerced or placed
under a state of duress either by actual threats of physical Court:
harm coming from malevolent quarters or simply because of
the judge’s intimidating robes.
Nevertheless. Read the law. If you entered a plea of guilty there should
be no condition attached. We cannot make that condition and dictate to
the court the penalty. 44
Although the pleas rendered, save for Perpenian’s, were improvidently the ruling of this Court in Crespo v. Judge Mogul, 56 once the
made, this Court will still not set aside the condemnatory judgment. information is filed, any disposition of the case or dismissal or acquittal
Despite the trial court judge’s shortcomings, we still agree with his or conviction of the accused rests within the exclusive jurisdiction,
ruling on accused-appellants’ culpability. competence and discretion of the courts; more so in this case, where
no Motion to Dismiss was filed by the prosecution.
As a general rule, convictions based on an improvident plea of guilt are
set aside and the cases are remanded for further proceedings if such The trial court took note of the fact that Perpenian gave inconsistent
plea is the sole basis of judgement. If the trial court, however, relied on answers and lied several times under oath during the trial. 57 Perpenian
sufficient and credible evidence to convict the accused, as it did in this lied about substantial details such as her real name, age, address and
case, the conviction must be sustained, because then it is predicated the fact that she saw Chan at the Elizabeth Resort. When asked why
not merely on the guilty plea but on evidence proving the commission she lied several times, Perpenian claimed she was scared to be
of the offense charged.45 The manner by which the plea of guilty is included or identified with the other accused-appellants. The lying and
made, whether improvidently or not, loses legal significance where the the fear of being identified with people whom she knew had done
conviction can be based on independent evidence proving the wrong are indicative of discernment. She knew, therefore, that there
commission of the crime by the accused.46 was an ongoing crime being committed at the resort while she was
there. It is apparent that she was fully aware of the consequences of
the unlawful act.
Contrary to accused-appellants’ assertions, they were convicted by the
trial court, not on the basis of their plea of guilty, but on the strength of
the evidence adduced by the prosecution, which was properly As reflected in the records,58 the prosecution was not able to proffer
appreciated by the trial court.47 The prosecution was able to prove the sufficient evidence to hold her responsible as a principal. Seeing that
guilt of the accused-appellants and their degrees of culpability beyond the only evidence the prosecution had was the testimony59 of Chan to
reasonable doubt. the effect that on 13 August 1998 Perpenian entered the room where
the victim was detained and conversed with Evad and Ronas regarding
stories unrelated to the kidnapping, this Court opines that Perpenian
Degree of Culpability
should not be held liable as a co-principal, but rather only as an
accomplice to the crime.
Accused-appellants Dukilman, Ronas and Evad argue in their
respective briefs that conspiracy, insofar as they were concerned, was
Jurisprudence60 is instructive of the elements required, in accordance
not convincingly established. Dukilman hinges his argument on the fact
with Article 18 of the Revised Penal Code, in order that a person may
that he was not one of those arrested during the rescue operation
be considered an accomplice, namely, (1) that there be community of
based on the testimony of Inspector Ouano.48 On the other hand,
design; that is knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
Ronas and Evad base their argument on the fact that they had no
participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose; (2) that he
participation whatsoever in the negotiation for the ransom money.
cooperates in the execution by previous or simultaneous act, with the
intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the
We hold otherwise. Although Dukilman was not one of those crime in an efficacious way; and (3) that there be a relation between
apprehended at the cottage during the rescue operation, the testimony the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person
of Police Inspector Arnado sufficiently established that he was one of charged as accomplice.
the four people apprehended when the police intercepted the
"Tamaraw FX" at the Nichols Tollgate. 49 Likewise, the testimony of
The defenses raised by Perpenian are not sufficient to exonerate her
Police Inspector Ouano sufficiently established that Ronas and Evad
criminal liability.1âwphi1 Assuming arguendo that she just came to the
were two of those who were arrested during the rescue
resort thinking it was a swimming party, it was inevitable that she
operation.50 This Court has held before that to be a conspirator, one
acquired knowledge of the criminal design of the principals when she
need not participate in every detail of the execution; he need not even
saw Chan being guarded in the room. A rational person would have
take part in every act or need not even know the exact part to be
suspected something was wrong and would have reported such
performed by the others in the execution of the conspiracy.51 Once
incident to the police. Perpenian, however, chose to keep quiet; and to
conspiracy is shown, the act of one is the act of all the conspirators.
add to that, she even spent the night at the cottage. It has been held
The precise extent or modality of participation of each of them
before that being present and giving moral support when a crime is
becomes secondary, since all the conspirators are
being committed will make a person responsible as an accomplice in
principals.52 Moreover, Chan positively identified the accused-
the crime committed.61 It should be noted that the accused-appellant’s
appellants and placed all of them at the crime scenes.
presence and company were not indispensable and essential to the
perpetration of the kidnapping for ransom; hence, she is only liable as
Under Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code, there is conspiracy when an accomplice.62 Moreover, this Court is guided by the ruling in People
two or more persons come to an agreement concerning a felony and v. Clemente, et al.,63 where it was stressed that in case of doubt, the
decide to commit it. It has been a long standing opinion of this Court participation of the offender will be considered as that of an accomplice
that proof of the conspiracy need not rest on direct evidence, as the rather than that of a principal.
same may be inferred from the collective conduct of the parties before,
during or after the commission of the crime indicating a common
Having admitted their involvement in the crime of kidnapping for
understanding among them with respect to the commission of the
ransom and considering the evidence presented by the prosecution,
offense.53 The testimonies, when taken together, reveal the common
linking accused-appellants’ participation in the crime, no doubt can be
purpose of the accused-appellants and how they were all united in its
entertained as to their guilt. The CA convicted the accused-appellants
execution from beginning to end. There were testimonies proving that
of kidnapping for ransom and imposed upon them the supreme penalty
(1) before the incident, two of the accused-appellants kept coming
of death, applying the provisions of Article 267 of the Revised Penal
back to the victim’s house; (2) during the kidnapping, accused-
Code. Likewise, this Court finds accused-appellants guilty beyond
appellants changed shifts in guarding the victim; and (3) the accused
reasonable doubt as principals to the crime of kidnapping for ransom.
appellants were those present when the ransom money was recovered
However, pursuant to R.A. No. 9346, 64 we modify the penalty imposed
and when the rescue operation was conducted.
by the trial court and reduce the penalty to Reclusion Perpetua, without
eligibility for parole.
Seeing that conspiracy among Gambao, Karim, Dukilman, Abao, Udal,
Mandao, Dilangalen, Macalinbol, Ronas and Evad was established
Modification should also be made as to the criminal liability of
beyond reasonable doubt based on the proffered evidence of the
Perpenian. Pursuant to the passing of R.A. No. 9344, 65 a determination
prosecution, the act of one is the act of all the conspirators.
of whether she acted with or without discernment is necessary.
Considering that Perpenian acted with discernment when she was 17
In Perpenian’s Supplemental Brief,54 she directs this Court’s attention years old at the time of the commission of the offense, her minority
to the manifestation made by the prosecution regarding their disinterest should be appreciated not as an exempting circumstance, but as a
in prosecuting, insofar as she was concerned. 55 However, pursuant to
privileged mitigating circumstance pursuant to Article 68 of the Revised 3. ₱100,000.00 as exemplary damages to set an example for
Penal Code. the public good.

Under Section 38 of R.A. No. 9344, 66 the suspension of sentence of a These amounts shall be the minimum indemnity and damages where
child in conflict with the law shall still be applied even if he/she is death is the penalty warranted by the facts but is not imposable under
already eighteen (18) years of age or more at the time of the present law.
pronouncement of his/her guilt.
The ruling of this Court in People v. Montesclaros76 is instructive on the
Unfortunately, at the present age of 31, Perpenian can no longer apportionment of civil liabilities among all the accused-appellants. The
benefit from the aforesaid provision, because under Article 40 of R.A. entire amount of the civil liabilities should be apportioned among all
No. 9344,67 the suspension of sentence can be availed of only until the those who cooperated in the commission of the crime according to the
child in conflict with the law reaches the maximum age of twenty-one degrees of their liability, respective responsibilities and actual
(21) years. This leaves the Court with no choice but to pronounce participation. Hence, each principal accused-appellant should shoulder
judgement. Perpenian is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt as an a greater share in the total amount of indemnity and damages than
accomplice in the crime of kidnapping for ransom. Since this Court has Perpenian who was adjudged as only an accomplice.
ruled that death as utilized in Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code
shall no longer form part of the equation in the graduation of penalties
Taking into account the difference in the degrees of their participation,
pursuant to R.A. No. 9346, 68 the penalty imposed by law on
all of them shall be liable for the total amount of ₱300,000.00 divided
accomplices in the commission of consummated kidnapping for
among the principals who shall be liable for ₱288,000.00 (or
ransom is Reclusion Temporal, the penalty one degree lower than
₱32,000.00 each) and Perpenian who shall be liable for ₱12,000.00.
what the principals would bear (Reclusion Perpetua). 69 Applying Article
This is broken down into ₱10,666.67 civil indemnity, ₱10,666.67 moral
68 of the Revised Penal Code, the imposable penalty should then be
damages and ₱10,666.67 exemplary damages for each principal; and
adjusted to the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law for
₱4,000.00 civil indemnity, ₱4,000.00 moral damages and ₱4,000.00
accomplices. This Court, therefore, holds that as to Perpenian, the
exemplary damages for the lone accomplice.
penalty of Prision Mayor, the penalty lower than that prescribed by law
(Reclusion Temporal), should be imposed. Applying the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, the minimum penalty, which is one degree lower than WHEREFORE, the 28 June 2005 Decision of the Court of Appeals in
the maximum imposable penalty, shall be within the range of Prision CA-G.R. CR–H.C. No. 00863 is hereby AFFIRMED WITH
Correccional; and the maximum penalty shall be within the minimum MODIFICATIONS. Accused-appellants HALIL GAMBAO y ESMAIL,
period of Prision Mayor, absent any aggravating circumstance and EDDIE KARIM y USO, EDWIN DUKILMAN y SUBOH, TONY ABAO y
there being one mitigating circumstance. Hence, the Court imposes the SULA, RAUL UDAL y KAGUI, THENG DILANGALEN y NANDING,
indeterminate sentence of six (6) months and one (1) day of Prision JAMAN MACALINBOL y KATOL, MONETTE RONAS y AMPIL and
Correccional, as minimum, to six (6) years and one (1) day of Prision NORA EVAD y MULOK are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt as
Mayor, as maximum. principals in the crime of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to
suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua, without eligibility of parole.
Accused-appellant THIAN PERPENIAN y RAFON A.K.A. LARINA
As regards Perpenian’s possible confinement in an agricultural camp
PERPENIAN is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt as accomplice in
or other training facility in accordance with Section 51 of R.A. 9344,
the crime of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to suffer the
this Court held in People v. Jacinto 70 that the age of the child in conflict
indeterminate penalty of six (6) months and one (1) day of Prision
with the law at the time of the promulgation of the judgment is not
Correccional, as minimum, to six (6) years and one (1) day of Prision
material. What matters is that the offender committed the offense when
Mayor, as maximum. Accused-appellants are ordered to indemnify the
he/she was still of tender age. This Court, however, finds such
victim in the amounts of ₱100,000.00 as civil indemnity, ₱100,000.00
arrangement no longer necessary in view of the fact that Perpenian’s
as moral damages and ₱100,000.00 as exemplary damages
actual served term has already exceeded the imposable penalty for her
apportioned in the following manner: the principals to the crime shall
offense. For such reason, she may be immediately released from
jointly and severally pay the victim the total amount of ₱288,000.00
detention.
while the accomplice shall pay the victim ₱12,000.00, subject to Article
110 of the Revised Penal Code on several and subsidiary liability.
We note that in the Order71 dated 9 October 1998, the trial court
admitted the documentary evidence offered by the counsel for the
The Court orders the Correctional Institute for Women to immediately
defense proving that the real name of Thian Perpenian is Larina
release THIAN PERPENIAN A.K.A. LARINA PERPENIAN due to her
Perpenian.
having fully served the penalty imposed on her, unless her further
detention is warranted for any other lawful causes.
In view of the death of Mandao during the pendency of this case, he is
relieved of all personal and pecuniary penalties attendant to the crime,
Let a copy of this decision be furnished for immediate implementation
his death72 having occurred before rendition of final judgement.73
to the Director of the Correctional Institute for Women by personal
service. The Director of the Correctional Institute for Women shall
There is prevailing jurisprudence,74 on civil liabilities arising from the submit to this Court, within five (5) days from receipt of a copy of the
commission of kidnapping for the purpose of extorting ransom from the decision, the action he has taken thereon.
victim or any other person under Article 267 of the Revised Penal
Code. The persons convicted were held liable for ₱75,000.00 as civil
SO ORDERED.
indemnity; ₱75,000.00 as moral damages; and ₱30,000.00 as
exemplary damages.

We take this opportunity to increase the amounts of indemnity and

damages, where, as in this case, the penalty for the crime committed is
death which, however, cannot be imposed because of the provisions of
R.A. No. 9346:75

1. ₱100,000.00 as civil indemnity;

2. ₱100,000.00 as moral damages which the victim is

assumed to have suffered and thus needs no proof; and
 RESOLUTION

BERSAMIN, J.:

The Court recognizes the mandate of Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile
Justice and Welfare Act of 2006) to protect the best interest of the child
in conflict with the law through measures that will ensure the
observance of international standards of child protection,1 and to apply
the principles of restorative justice in all laws, policies and programs
applicable to children in conflict with the law.2 The mandate
notwithstanding, the Court will not hesitate or halt to impose the
penalty of imprisonment whenever warranted on a child in conflict with
the law.

Antecedents

The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Camarines Sur charged the

petitioner with homicide under the following information docketed as
Criminal Case No. 2000-0275 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
Branch 20, in Naga City, to wit:

That on or about the 30th day of March, 2000 at about 7:30 P.M., in
Barangay Dalupaon, Pasacao, Camarines Sur, Philippines, and within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with intent to
kill, and without any justifiable cause, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously assault, attack and stab one JAYSON
ESPINOLA Y BANTA with a knife , inflicting upon the latter mortal
wounds in his body, thus, directly causing his death, per Death
Certification hereto attached as annex "A" and made an integral part
hereof, to the damage and prejudice of the deceased’s heirs in such
amount as may be proven in court.

Acts Contrary to Law.3

The CA summarized the facts established by the Prosecution and the

Defense as follows: Alejandro Dequito testified that around seven in
the evening or so of March 30, 2000, he, together with his compadre
Nicasio, was at the gate of Dalupaon Elementary School watching the
graduation ceremony if the high school students. While watching, his
cousin Jason Espinola, herein victim, arrived. Later, however, appellant
approached the victim and stabbed the latter. When asked to
demonstrate in open court how the appellant stabbed the victim, this
witness demonstrated that with the appellant’s left arm around the neck
of the victim, appellant stabbed the victim using a bladed weapon.

He aided the victim as the latter was already struggling to his feet and
later brought him to the hospital.

Nicasio Ligadia, witness Dequito’s companion at the time of the

incident, corroborated the testimony of Dequito on all material points.

Marlyn Espinosa, the mother of the deceased, testified that her son
was stabbed in front of the [elementary] school and later brought to the
Bicol Medical Center. She stated that her son stayed for more than a
month in the hospital. Thereafter, her son was discharged. Later,
however, when her son went back to the hospital for a check-up, it was
discovered that her son’s stab wound had a complication. Her son was
subjected to another operation, but died the day after. She, further,
stated that the stabbing incident was reported to the police authorities.
She, likewise, stated the amounts she incurred for the wake and burial
of her son.

Robert Casin, the medico legal expert, testified that the cause of death
of the victim, as stated by Dr. Bichara, his co-admitting physician, was
organ failure overwhelming infection. He, further, stated that the
G.R. No. 176102               November 26, 2014 underlined cause of death was a stab wound.

ROSAL HUBILLA y CARILLO, Petitioner, The appellant, in his testimony, narrates his statement of facts in this
vs. manner:
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
He testified that around seven inthe evening or so of March 30, 2000, indemnity, in the amount of Php 50,000.00, is awarded to the legal
he was at the Dalupaon High School campus watching the high school heirs of the victim Jason Espinola. We affirm in all other respects.
graduation rites. At half past seven, while walking towards the gate of
Dalupaon High School on his way home, he was ganged up by a group
The case is, hereby, remanded to the Regional Trial Court of Naga,
of four (4) men.
Branch 20, for appropriate action on the application for probation of,
herein, appellant.
The men attacked and started to box him. After the attack he felt dizzy
and fell to the ground. He was not able to see or even recognize who
SO ORDERED.
attacked him, so he proceeded home. Shortly after leaving the
campus, however, he met somebody whom he thought was one of the
four men who ganged up on him. He stabbed the person with the knife Issues
he was, then, carrying. When asked why he was in possession of a
knife, he stated that he used it in preparing food for his friend, Richard
The petitioner has come to the Court imputing grave error to the CA for
Candelaria, who was graduating that day. He went home after the
not correctly imposing the penalty, and for not suspending his sentence
incident.
as a juvenile in conflict with the law pursuant to the mandate of
Republic Act No. 9344. In fine, he no longer assails the findings of fact
While inside his house, barangay officials arrived, took him and by the lower courts as well as his conviction, and limits his appeal to
brought him to the barangay hall, and later to the Pasacao PNP. On his the following issues, namely: (1) whether or not the CA imposed the
way to the town proper, he came to know that the person he stabbed correct penalty imposable on him taking into consideration the
was Jason Espinola. He felt sad after hearing it.4 pertinent provisions of Republic Act No. 9344, the Revised Penal
Codeand Act No. 4103 (Indeterminate Sentence Law); (2) whether or
not he was entitled to the benefits of probation and suspension of
Judgment of the RTC
sentence under Republic Act No. 9344; and (3) whether or not
imposing the penalty of imprisonment contravened the provisions of
After trial, the RTC rendered its judgment finding the petitioner guilty of Republic Act No. 9344 and other international agreements.
homicide as charged, and sentenced him to suffer the indeterminate
penalty of imprisonment for four years and one day of prision
Ruling of the Court
correccional, as minimum, to eight years and one day of prision mayor,
as maximum; and to pay to the heirs of the victim ₱81,890.04 as actual
damages for medical and funeral expenses, and ₱50,000.00 as moral Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code prescribes the penalty of
damages.5 reclusion temporalfor homicide. Considering that the petitioner was
then a minor at the time of the commission of the crime, being 17
years, four months and 28 days old when he committed the homicide
Decision of the CA
on March 30, 2000,8 such minority was a privileged mitigating
circumstance that lowered the penalty to prision mayor.9
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the petitioner’s
conviction but modified the penalty and the civil liability through the
Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum of the
decision promulgated on July 19, 2006,6 disposing thus:
indeterminate sentence should be within the penalty next lower than
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the decision of the Regional Trial
the imposable penalty, which, herein, was prision correccional (i.e., six
Court of Naga City, Branch 20, in Criminal Case Number 2000-0275,
months and one day to six years). For the maximum of the
finding appellant Rosal Hubilla y Carillo, guilty beyond reasonable
indeterminate sentence, prision mayor in its medium period – eight
doubt of Homicide is, hereby, AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS.
years and one day to 10 years – was proper because there were no
Appellants (sic) sentence is reduced to six months and one day to six
mitigating or aggravating circumstances present. Accordingly, the CA
years of prision correccionalas minimum, to six years and one day to
imposed the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six months and
twelve years of prision mayor as maximum.
one day of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight years and one
day of prision mayor, as maximum.
The civil aspect of the case is MODIFIED to read: The award of actual
damages in the amount of Php 81,890.04, representing expenses for
The petitioner insists, however, that the maximum of his indeterminate
medical and funeral services, is reduced to Php 16,300.00. A civil
sentence of eight years and one day of prison mayor should be
indemnity, in the amount of Php 50,000.00, is awarded to the legal
reduced to only six years of prision correccional to enable him to apply
heirs of the victim Jason Espinola. Weaffirm in all other respects.
for probation under Presidential Decree No. 968.

SO ORDERED.
The petitioner’s insistence is bereft of legal basis. Neither the Revised
Penal Code, nor Republic Act No. 9344, nor any other relevant law or
On motion for reconsideration by the petitioner, the CA promulgated its rules support or justify the further reduction of the maximum of the
amended decision on December 7, 2006, decreeing as follows:7 indeterminate sentence. To yield to his insistence would be to impose
an illegal penalty, and would cause the Court to deliberately violate the
law.
WHEREFORE, the instant Motion for Reconsideration is PARTIALLY
GRANTED. Our decision promulgated on July 16, 2006, which is the
subject of the instant motion is, hereby AMENDED such that the A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC10 (Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law)
judgment shall now read as follows: provides certain guiding principles in the trial and judging in cases
involving a child in conflict with the law. One of them is that found in
Section 46 (2), in conjunction with Section 5 (k), whereby the
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the decision of the Regional Trial
restrictions on the personal liberty of the child shall be limited to the
Court of Naga City, Branch 20, in Criminal Case Number 2000-0275,
minimum.11 Consistent with this principle, the amended decision of the
finding appellant Rosal Hubilla y Carillo, guilty beyond reasonable
CA imposed the ultimate minimums of the indeterminate penalty for
doubt of Homicide is, hereby, AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS.
homicide under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. On its part, Republic
Appellant is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of six months and
Act No. 9344 nowhere allows the trial and appellate courts the
one day of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight (8) years and one
discretion to reduce or lower the penalty further, even for the sake of
(1) day of prision mayor.
enabling the child in conflict with the law to qualify for probation.

The civil aspect of the case is MODIFIED to read: The award of actual
Conformably with Section 9(a) of Presidential Decree 968,12 which
damages in the amount of Php 81,890.04, representing expenses for
disqualifies from probation an offender sentenced to serve a maximum
medical and funeral services, is reduced to Php 16,300.00. A civil
term of imprisonment of more than six years, the petitioner could not
qualify for probation. For this reason, we annul the directive of the CA G.R. No. 185843               March 3, 2010
to remand the case to the trial court to determine if he was qualified for
probation.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee,
vs.
Although Section 38 of Republic Act No. 9344 allows the suspension of RONIE DE GUZMAN, Appellant.
the sentence of a child in conflict with the law adjudged as guilty of a
crime, the suspension is available only until the child offender turns 21
RESOLUTION
years of age, pursuant to Section 40 of Republic Act No. 9344, to wit:

NACHURA, J.:
Section 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court.– If the
court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon
the child in conflict with the law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in This resolves the motion for extinguishment of the criminal action and
conflict with the law has wilfully failed to comply with the conditions of reconsideration of our Resolution dated July 20, 2009 filed by appellant
his/her disposition or rehabilitation program, the child in conflict with Ronie de Guzman.
the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment.
Appellant was indicted before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 163,
If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years of Pasig City, for two counts of rape. He pled "not guilty" when arraigned.
age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine After pretrial and trial, the trial court found him guilty as charged and
whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order imposed on him the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. The
execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a trial court further ordered him to indemnify the victim ₱50,000.00 in
certain specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of each case or a total amount of ₱100,000.00 as civil indemnity.
twenty-one (21) years.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed, in its Decision dated
We note that the petitioner was well over 23 years of age at the time of March 27, 2008, appellant’s conviction, but modified it with an
his conviction for homicide by the RTC on July 19, 2006. Hence, the additional award of ₱50,000.00 for each case, or an aggregate amount
suspension of his sentence was no longer legally feasible or of ₱100,000.00, as moral damages.
permissible.
Appellant elevated the case to this Court on appeal.
Lastly, the petitioner posits that condemning him to prison would be in
violation of his rights as a child inconflict with the law as bestowed by
In a Resolution dated July 20, 2009, we dismissed the appeal for
Republic Act No. 9344 and international agreements.1avvphi1 A
failure of appellant to sufficiently show reversible error in the
review of the provisions of Republic Act No. 9344 reveals, however,
challenged decision as would warrant the exercise of the Court’s
that imprisonment of children in conflict with the law is by no means
appellate jurisdiction. Accordingly, the March 27, 2008 Decision of the
prohibited. While Section 5 (c) of Republic Act No. 9344 bestows on
CA was affirmed in toto.
children in conflict with the law the rightnot to be unlawfully or arbitrarily
deprived of their liberty; imprisonment as a proper disposition of a case
is duly recognized, subject to certain restrictions on the imposition of In the instant motion, appellant alleges that he and private complainant
imprisonment, namely: (a) the detention or imprisonment is a contracted marriage on August 19, 2009, solemnized by Reverend
disposition of last resort, and (b) the detention or imprisonment shall be Lucas R. Dangatan of Jeruel Christ-Centered Ministries, Inc. at the
for the shortest appropriate period of time.Thereby, the trial and Amazing Grace Christian Ministries, Inc., Bldg. XI-A, Bureau of
appellate courts did not violate the letter and spirit of Republic Act No. Corrections, Muntinlupa City. Attached to the motion is the pertinent
9344 by imposing the penalty of imprisonment on the petitioner simply Certificate of Marriage1 and a joint sworn statement ("Magkasamang
because the penalty was imposed as a last recourse after holding him Sinumpaang Salaysay")2 executed by appellant and private
to be disqualified from probation and from the suspension of his complainant, attesting to the existence of a valid and legal marriage
sentence, and the term of his imprisonment was for the between them. Appellant, thus, prays that he be absolved of his
shortestduration permitted by the law. conviction for the two counts of rape and be released from
imprisonment, pursuant to Article 266-C3 of the Revised Penal Code
(RPC).
A survey of relevant international agreements13 supports the course of
action taken herein. The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for
the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Guidelines), 14 the United In its Comment/Manifestation,4 appellee, through the Office of the
Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Solicitor General, interposed no objection to the motion, finding the
Guidelines) and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of marriage to have been contracted in good faith, and the motion to be
Juveniles Deprived of Liberty15 are consistent in recognizing that legally in order.
imprisonment is a valid form of disposition, provided it is imposed asa
last resort and for the minimum necessary period.
The motion should be granted.

Lastly, following Section 51 of Republic Act No. 9344, the petitioner,

although he has to serve his sentence, may serve it in an agricultural In relation to Article 266-C of the RPC, Article 89 of the same Code
camp or other training facilities to be established, maintained, reads –
supervised and controlled by the Bureau of Corrections, in coordination
with the Department of Social Welfare and Development, in a manner ART. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. – Criminal liability
consistent with the offender child’s best interest. Such service of is totally extinguished:
sentence will be in lieu of service in the regular penal institution.
xxxx
WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES the petition for review on certiorari;
AFFIRMS the amended decision promulgated on December 7, 2006 in
C.A.-G.R. CR No. 29295, but DELETING the order to remand the 7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in
judgment to the trial court for implementation; and DIRECTS the
Bureau of Corrections to commit the petitioner for the service of his Article 344 of this Code.
sentence in an agricultural camp or other training facilities under its
control, supervision and management, in coordination with the
Department of Social Welfare and Development. Article 344 of the same Code also provides –
ART. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, G.R. No. 163879               July 30, 2014
seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness. – x x x.
DR. ANTONIO P. CABUGAO, Petitioner,
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, and rape, the vs.
marriage of the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and SPOUSES RODOLFO M.
criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. x x x. PALMA and ROSARIO F. PALMA, Respondents.

On several occasions, we applied these provisions to marriages x-----------------------x

contracted between the offender and the offended party in the crime of
rape,5 as well as in the crime of abuse of chastity, 6 to totally extinguish
G.R. No. 165805
the criminal liability of and the corresponding penalty that may have
been imposed upon those found guilty of the felony. Parenthetically,
we would like to mention here that prior to the case at bar, the last DR. CLENIO YNZON, Petitioner,
case bearing similar circumstances was decided by this Court in 1974, vs.
or around 36 years ago.1avvphi1 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and SPOUSES RODOLFO M.
PALMA AND ROSARIO F. PALMA, Respondents.
Based on the documents, including copies of pictures7 taken after the
ceremony and attached to the motion, we find the marriage between DECISION
appellant and private complainant to have been contracted validly,
legally, and in good faith, as an expression of their mutual love for each
PERALTA, J.:
other and their desire to establish a family of their own. Given public
policy considerations of respect for the sanctity of marriage and the
highest regard for the solidarity of the family, we must accord appellant Before this Court are appeals via Rule 45 from the Decision 1 dated
the full benefits of Article 89, in relation to Article 344 and Article 266-C June 4, 2004 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 27293,
of the RPC. affirming the Decision2 dated February 28,2003 of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC), convicting appellant Dr. Antonio P. Cabugao (Dr.
Cabugao) and Dr. Clenio Ynzon (Dr. Ynzon) of the crime of Reckless
WHEREFORE, the motion is GRANTED. Appellant Ronie de Guzman
Imprudence Resulting to Homicide.
is ABSOLVED of the two (2) counts of rape against private
complainant Juvilyn Velasco, on account of their subsequent marriage,
and is ordered RELEASED from imprisonment. The Information3 alleged –

Let a copy of this Resolution be furnished the Bureau of Corrections for That on or about June 17, 2000in the City of Dagupan, Philippines, and
appropriate action. No costs. within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the abovenamed
accused, DR. ANTONIO P.CABUGAO and DR. CLENIO YNZON,
being then the attending physicians of one RODOLFO PALMA, JR., a
SO ORDERED.
minor 10 years old, confederating and acting jointly with one another,
did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously fail through
negligence, carelessness and imprudence to perform immediate
operation upon their patient, RODOLFO PALMA, JR. of acute
appendicitis, when they, the said physicians, should have been done
so considering that examinations conducted upon their patient Rodolfo
Palma, Jr. seriously manifest todo so, causing by such negligence,
carelessness, and imprudence the victim, RODOLFO PALMA JR., to
die due to:

"CARDIORESPIRATORY ARREST, METABOLIC

ENCEPHALOPATHY, SEPTICEMIA (ACUTE APPENDICITIS),
CEREBRAL ANEURYSM RUPTURED (?)"

As per Certificate of Death issued by accused Dr. Antonio P. Cabugao,

to the damage and prejudice of the legal heirs of said deceased
RODOLFO PALMA, JR. and other consequential damages relative
thereto.

CONTRARY to Article 365, 1st par. of the Revised Penal Code.

Dagupan City, Philippines, January 29, 2001.

Arising from the same events, the Court resolved to consolidate these
cases.4 The facts, as culled from the records, are as follows:

On June 14, 2000, at around 4 o'clock in the afternoon, ten (10)-year

old Rodolfo F. Palma, Jr. (JR) complained of abdominal pain to his
mother, Rosario Palma. At 5 o’clock that sameafternoon, Palma's
mother and father, Atty. Rodolfo Palma Sr., brought JR to the clinic of
accused Dr. Cabugao. Dr. Cabugao, a general practitioner,
specializing in familymedicine gave medicines for the pain and told
Palma's parents to call him up if his stomach pains continue. Due to
persistent abdominal pains, at 4:30 in the early morning of June 15,
2000, they returnedto Dr. Cabugao, who advised them to bring JR to
the Nazareth General Hospital in Dagupan City, for confinement. JR
was admitted at the said hospital at 5:30 in the morning.5
Blood samples were taken from JR for laboratory testing. The complete complete blood count (CBC) and a diagnostic ultrasound on JR. The
blood count conveyed the following result: wbc – 27.80 x 10 9/L; findings of the CBC and ultrasound showed that an inflammatory
lymphocytes – 0.10 and neutrophils – 0.90. Diagnostic ultrasound was process or infection was going on inside the body of JR. Said
likewise conducted on the patient's lower abdomen by radiologist, Dr. inflammatory process was happening in the periumbilical region where
Ricky V. Querubin, with the following findings: the appendix could be located. The initial diagnosis of acute
appendicitis appears to be a distinct possibility. x x x.
Normal liver, bile ducts, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen, kidneys and
urinary bladder. Dr. Ynzon ordered medications to treat the symptoms being
manifested by JR. Thereafter, he ordered that JR be observed for 24
hours. However, the accused, as the attending physicians, did not
There is no free peritoneal fluid.
personally monitor JR in order to check on subtle changes that may
occur. Rather, they left the monitoring and actual observation to
There is localized tenderness in the paraumbilical region, more so in resident physicians who are just on residency training and in doing so,
the supra and right paraumbilical areas. they substituted their own expertise, skill and competence with those of
physicians who are merely new doctors still on training. Not having
personally observed JR during this 24-hour critical period of
There is a vague elongated hypoechoic focus in the right periumbilical observation, the accused relinquished their duty and thereby were
region roughly about 47 x 18 mm surrounded by undistended gas-filled unable to give the proper and correct evaluation as to the real condition
bowels. This is suggestive of an inflammatory process wherein of JR. In situations where massive infection is going on as shown by
appendiceal or periappendiceal pathology cannot be excluded. Clinical the aggressive medication of antibiotics, the condition of the patient is
correlation is essential."6 serious which necessitated personal, not delegated, attention of
attending physicians, namely JR and the accused in this case.
Dr. Cabugao did a rectal examination noting the following: "rectal: good
sphincter, negative tenderness, negative mass." The initial impression xxxx
was Acute Appendicitis,7 and hence, he referred the case to his co-
accused, Dr. Ynzon, a surgeon.8 In the later part of the morning of
June 15, 2000, Dr. Ynzon went to the hospital and readthe CBC and Throughout the course of the hospitalization and treatment of JR, the
ultrasound results. The administration of massive antibiotics and pain accused failed to address the acute appendicitis which was the initial
reliever to JRwere ordered. Thereafter, JR was placed on observation diagnosis. They did not take steps to find out if indeed acute
for twenty-four (24) hours. appendicitis was what was causing the massive infection that was
ongoing inside the body of JR even when the inflammatory process
was located at the paraumbilical region where the appendix can be
In the morning of June 16, 2000, JR complained again of abdominal located. x x x
pain and his parents noticeda swelling in his scrotum. In the afternoon
of the same day, JR vomitted out greenish stuff three (3) times and had
watery bowels also three (3) times. The nurses on-duty relayed JR's There may have been other diseases but the records do not show that
condition to Dr. Ynzon who merely gaveorders via telephone. 9 Accused the accused took steps to find outwhat disease exactly was plaguing
continued medications to alleviate JR's abdominal spasms and JR. It was their duty to find out the disease causing the health problem
diarrhea. By midnight, JR again vomitted twice, had loose bowel of JR, but they did not perform any process of elimination. Appendicitis,
movements and was unable to sleep. The following morning, June according to expert testimonies, could be eliminated only by surgery
17,2000, JR's condition worsened, he had a running fever of 38°C. but no surgery was done by the accused. But the accused could not
JR's fever remained uncontrolled and he became unconscious, he was have found out the real disease of JR because they were treating
given Aeknil (1 ampule) and Valium (1 ampule). JR's condition merely and exclusively the symptoms by means of the different
continued to deteriorate that by 2 o'clock in the afternoon, JR's medications to arrest the manifested symptoms. In fact, by treating the
temperature soared to 42°C, had convulsions and finally died. symptoms alone, the accused were recklessly and wantonly ignoring
the same as signs of the graver health problem of JR. This gross
negligence on the part of the accused allowed the infection to spread
The Death Certificate10 dated June 19, 2000 prepared by Dr. Cabugao inside the body of JR unabated. The infection obviously spread so
indicated the following causes of death: fastand was so massive that within a period of only two and a half (2
½) days from the day of admission to the hospital on June 15, 2000,
Immediate cause: CARDIORESPIRATORY ARREST JR who was otherwise healthy died [of] Septicemia (Acute
Appendicitis) on June 17, 2000.11
Antecedent cause: METABOLIC ENCEPHALOPATHY
On June 4, 2004, in affirming the accused' conviction, the Court of
Appeals gave similar observations, to wit:
Underlying cause: SEPTICEMIA (ACUTE APPENDICITIS)

The foregoing expert testimony clearly revealed such want of

Other significant conditionscontributing to death: reasonable skill and care on the part of JR's attending physicians,
appellants Dr. Cabugao and Dr. Ynzon in neglecting to monitor
CEREBRAL ANEURYSM RUPTURED (?) effectively and sufficiently the developments/changes during the
observation period and act upon the situation after said 24-hour period
when his abdominal pain subsisted, his condition even worsened with
No post-mortem examination was conducted on JR. On February 1, the appearance of more serious symptoms of nausea, vomiting and
2001, an Information was filed against accused for reckless diarrhea. Considering the brief visit only made on regular rounds, the
imprudence resulting to homicide. At their arraignment, both accused, records clearly show such gross negligence in failing to take
duly assisted by counsel, pleaded not guilty to the charge. appropriate steps to determine the real cause of JR's abdominal pain
so that the crucial decision to perform surgery (appendectomy) had
On February 28, 2003, in convicting both the accused, the trial court even been ruled out precisely because of the inexcusable neglect to
found the following circumstances as sufficient basis to conclude that undertake suchefficient diagnosis by process of elimination, as
accused were indeed negligent in the performance of their duties: correctly pointed out by the trial court. As has been succinctly
emphasized by Dr. Mateo, acute appendicitis was the working
diagnosis, and with the emergence of symptoms after the 24-hour
It is unquestionable that JR was under the medical care of the accused observation (high fever, vomiting, diarrhea) still, appellants ruled out
from the time of his admission for confinement at the Nazareth General surgery, not even considering exploratory laparoscopy. Dr. Mateo also
Hospital until his death. Upon his admission, the initial working expressed the opinion that the decision to operate could have been
diagnosis was to consider acute appendicitis. To assist the accused in made after the result of the ultrasound test, considering that acute
the consideration of acute appendicitis, Dr. Cabugao requested for a
appendicitis was the initial diagnosis by Dr. Cabugao after he had DECLARED/TESTIFIED THAT PETITIONER DR. CABUGAO HAD
conducted a rectal examination. THE DUTY TO PERFORM IMMEDIATE OPERATION ON RODOLFO
PALMA, JR., AND THEY FAILED TO STATE/SHOW THAT THE
PROXIMATE CAUSE OF DEATH OF JR WAS ACUTE
Medical records buttress the trial court's finding that in treating JR,
APPENDICITIS;
appellants have demonstrated indifference and neglect of the patient's
condition as a serious case. Indeed, appendicitis remains a clinical
emergencyand a surgical disease, as correctly underscored by Dr. VI
Mateo, a practicing surgeon who has already performed over a
thousand appendectomy. In fact, appendectomy is the only rational
WHETHER THE EXPERT WITNESSES PRESENTED BY THE
therapy for acute appendicitis; it avoids clinical deterioration and may
PROSECUTION EVER QUESTIONED THE MANAGEMENT AND
avoid chronic or recurrent appendicitis. Although difficult, prompt
CARE APPLIED BY PETITIONER DR. CABUGAO;
recognition and immediate treatment of the disease prevent
complications. Under the factual circumstances, the inaction, neglect
and indifference of appellants who, after the day of admission and after VII
being apprised of the ongoing infection from the CBC and initial
diagnosis as acute appendicitis from rectal examination and ultrasound
WHETHER THE EXPERT WITNESSES PRESENTED BY THE
testand only briefly visited JR once during regular rounds and gave
DEFENSE ARE UNANIMOUS IN APPROVING THE METHOD OF
medication orders by telephone – constitutes gross negligenceleading
TREATMENT APPLIED BY BOTH ACCUSED DOCTORS ON
to the continued deterioration of the patient, his infection having spread
SUBJECT PATIENT, AND THEY DECLARED/AFFIRMED THAT
in sofast a pace that he died within just two and a half (2 ½) days’ stay
THEY WOULD FIRST PLACE SUBJECT THE PATIENT UNDER
inthe hospital. Authorities state that if the clinical picture is unclear a
OBSERVATION, AND WOULD NOT PERFORM IMMEDIATE
short period of 4 to 6 hours of watchful waiting and a CT scan may
OPERATION;
improve diagnostic accuracy and help to hasten diagnosis.Even
assuming that JR's case had an atypical presentation in view of the
location of his appendix, laboratory tests could have helped to confirm VIII
diagnosis, as Dr. Mateo opined thatthe possibility of JR having a
retrocecal appendicitis should have been a strong consideration.
Lamentably, however, as found by the trial court, appellants had not WHETHER THE CONVICTION OF PETITIONER DR. YNZON WAS
taken steps towards correct diagnosis and demonstrated laxity even ESTABLISHED WITH THE REQUIRED QUANTUM OF PROOF
when JR was already running a high fever in the morning of June 17, BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE PATIENT WAS
2000 and continued vomiting with diarrhea, his abdominal pain SPECIFICALLY SUFFERING FROM AND DIED OF ACUTE
becoming more intense. This is the reason why private complainants APPENDICITIS; and
were not even apprised of the progress of appellants' diagnosis –
appellants have nothing to report because they did nothing towards the IX
end and merely gave medications to address the symptoms.12
WHETHER THE FAILURE TO CONDUCT THE SPECIFIC SURGICAL
Thus, these appeals brought beforethis Court raising the following OPERATION KNOWN AS APPENDECTOMY CONSTITUTED
arguments: CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE.

I In a nutshell, the petition brought before this Court raises the issue of
whether or not petitioners' conviction of the crime of reckless
WHETHER THE CAUSE OF ACCUSATION AS CONTAINED IN THE imprudence resulting in homicide, arising from analleged medical
INFORMATION IS "FAILURE TO PERFORM IMMEDIATE malpractice, is supported by the evidence on record.
OPERATION UPON THE PATIENT ROFOLFO PALMA JR. OF
ACUTE APPENDICITIS; Worth noting is that the assigned errors are actually factual in nature,
which as a general rule, findings of factof the trial court and the Court
II of Appeals are binding and conclusiveupon this Court, and we will not
normally disturb such factual findings unless the findings of the court
are palpably unsupported by the evidence on record or unless the
WHETHER THE SUBJECT INFORMATION APPEARS TO HAVE judgment itself is based on misapprehension of facts. Inthe instant
ACCUSED BOTH ACCUSED DOCTORS OF CONSPIRACY AND case, we find the need to make certain exception.
THE APPEALED DECISION SEEMS TO HAVE TREATED BOTH
ACCUSED DOCTORS TO BE IN CONSPIRACY;
AS TO DR. YNZON'S LIABILITY:

III
Reckless imprudence consists of voluntarily doing or failing to do,
without malice, an act from which material damage results by reason of
WHETHER PETITIONER DR. CABUGAO IS A GENERAL an inexcusable lack of precautionon the part of the person performing
PRACTITIONER (NOT A SURGEON) AND HAVE EXCLUDED or failing to perform such act.13 The elements of reckless imprudence
SURGERY FROM THE LIMITS OFHIS PRACTICE, AND IT WAS NOT are: (1) that the offender does or fails to do an act; (2) that the doing or
AND NEVER HIS DUTY TO OPERATE THE PATIENT RODOLFO the failure to do that act is voluntary; (3) that it bewithout malice; (4)
PALMA JR., THAT WAS WHY HE REFERRED SUBJECT PATIENT that material damage results from the reckless imprudence; and (5)
TO A SURGEON, DR. CLENIO YNZON; that there is inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the offender,
taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of
intelligence, physical condition, and other circumstances regarding
IV
persons, time and place.14

WHETHER THE DEFENSE NEVER STATED THAT THERE IS

With respect to Dr. Ynzon, all the requisites of the offense have been
GUARANTEE THAT DOING SURGERY WOULD HAVE SAVED THE
clearly established by the evidence on record. The court a quoand the
PATIENT;
appellate court were one in concluding that Dr. Ynzon failed to observe
the required standard of care expected from doctors.
V
In the instant case, it was sufficiently established that to prevent certain
WHETHER THE WITNESSES FOR THE PROSECUTION death, it was necessary to perform surgery on JR immediately. Even
INCLUDING PROSECUTION'S EXPERT WITNESSES EVER
the prosecution’s own expert witness, Dr. Antonio Mateo,15 testified Q. So precisely if the change is a condition which bring you in doubt
during cross-examination that he would perform surgery on JR: that there is something else other than appendicitis, would you extend
over a period of 24 hours?
ATTY. CASTRO:
A. It depends on the emergent development, sir.
Q. Given these data soft non-tender abdomen, ambulatory, watery
diarrhea, Exhibit C which is the ultrasound result, with that laboratory Q. That is the point, if you are the attending physician and there is a
would you operate the patient? change not pointing to appendicitis, would you extend over a period of
24 hours?
A Yes, I would do surgery.
A. In 24 hours you have to decide, sir.
Q And you should have done surgery with this particular case?"
xxxx
A Yes, sir.16
Q. And that is based on the assessment of the attending physician?
xxxx
A. Yes, sir.18
COURT:
Dr. Mateo further testified on cross-examination:
Q You stated a while ago doctor thatyou are going to [do] surgery to
the patient, why doctor, if you are notgoing to do surgery, what will ATTY. CASTRO:
happen?
Q: So you will know yourself, as far as the record is concerned,
A If this would be appendicitis, the usual progress would be that it because if you will agree with me, you did not even touch the patient?
would be ruptured and generalized peritonitis and eventually
septicemia, sir.
A. Yes, I based my opinion on what is put on record, sir. The records
show that after the observation period, the abdominal pain is still there
Q What do you mean by that doctor? plus there are already other signs and symptoms which are not seen or
noted.
A That means that infection would spread throughout the body, sir.
Q. But insofar as you yourself not having touched the abdomen of the
patient, would you give a comment on that?
Q If unchecked doctor, what will happen?

A. Yes, based on the record, after 24 hours of observation, the pain

A It will result to death.17
apparently was still there and there was more vomiting and there was
diarrhea. In my personal opinion, I think the condition of the patient
xxxx was deteriorating.

Q And what would have you doneif you entertain other considerations Q. Even though you have not touched the patient?
from the time the patient was admitted?
A. I based on what was on the record, sir.19
A From the time the patient was admitted until the report of the
sonologist, I would have made a decision by then.
From the foregoing, it is clear that if JR’s condition remained
unchecked it would ultimately result in his death, as what actually
Q And when to decide the surgery would it be a particular exact time, happened in the present case. Another expert witness for the defense,
would it be the same for all surgeons? Dr. Vivencio Villaflor, Jr. testified on direct examination that he would
perform a personal and thorough physical examination of the patient as
frequent as every 4 to 6 hours, to wit:
A If you are asking acute appendicitis, it would be about 24 hours
because acute appendicitis is a 24-hour disease, sir.
ATTY. CASTRO:
Q. And would it be correct to say that it depends on the changes on the
condition of the patient? Q. As an expert doctor, if you were faced with a history of abdominal
pain with nausea, vomiting, fever, anurecia (sic), elevated white blood
cell count, physical examination of a positive psoas sign, observation
A. Yes, sir. of the sonologist of abdominal tenderness and the ultrasound findings
of the probability of appendiceal (sic) pathology, what will you do if you
Q. So, are you saying more than 24 hours when there are changes? have faced these problems, Doctor?

A. If there are changes in the patient pointing towards appendicitis then A. I will examine the patient thoroughly and it will depend on my
you have to decide right there and then, sir. physical examination and that isprobably every 4 to 6 hours, sir.20

Q. So if there are changes in the patient pointing to appendicitis? On cross-examination, Dr. Villaflor affirmed:

A. It depends now on what you are trying to wait for in the observation Cross Exam. By Atty. Marteja:
period, sir.
Q. x x x However, there are corrections and admissions made at that during the crucial times on June 16, 2000 when JR's condition started
time, your Honor, do I understand thatT/C does not mean ruled out but to deteriorate until JR's death. As the attending surgeon, he should be
rather to consider the matter? primarily responsible in monitoring the condition of JR, as he is in the
best position considering his skills and experience to know if the
patient's condition had deteriorated. While the resident-doctors-onduty
A. Yes, now that I have seen the records of the patient, it says here,
could likewise monitor the patient’scondition, he is the one directly
impression and T/C means to consider the appendicitis.
responsible for the patient as the attending surgeon. Indeed, it is
reckless and gross negligence of duty to relegate his personal
Q. Isn't it that it is worth then to say that the initial working diagnosis on responsibility to observe the condition of the patient. Again, acute
Rodolfo Palma, Jr., otherwise known as JR, to whom I shall now refer appendicitis was the working diagnosis, and with the emergence of
to as JR, the primary consideration then is acute appendicitis, is that graver symptoms after the 24-hour observation, Dr. Ynzon ruled out
correct to say Doctor? surgery for no apparent reason. We, likewise, note that the records are
devoid of showing of any reasonable cause which would lead Dr.
Ynzon tooverrule appendectomy despite the initial diagnosis of
A. I think so, that is the impression. appendicitis. Neitherwas there any showing that he was entertaining
another diagnosis nor he took appropriate steps towards another
Q. x x x Now if it is to be considered as the primary consideration in the diagnosis.
initial working diagnosis, isn't it a fact that it has tobe ruled out in order
to consider it as not the disease of JR? Among the elements constitutive of reckless imprudence, what
perhaps is most central to a finding of guilt is the conclusive
A. Yes. Sir. determination that the accused has exhibited, by his voluntary act
without malice, an inexcusable lack of precaution. It is that which
supplies the criminal intent so indispensable as tobring an act of mere
Q. Isn't it a fact thatto rule out acute appendicitis as not the disease of negligence and imprudence under the operation of the penal law. This
JR, surgery or operation must be done, isn't it Doctor? is because a conscious indifference to the consequences of the
conduct is all that is required from the standpoint of the frame of mind
A. You have to correlate all the findings. of the accused.24 Quasioffenses penalize the mental attitudeor
condition behind the act, the dangerous recklessness, the lack of care
or foresight, the "imprudencia punible," unlike willful offenses which
Q. Is it yes or no, Doctor? punish the intentional criminal act.25 This is precisely where this Court
found Dr. Ynzon to be guilty of - his seemingly indifference to the
A. Yes. deteriorating condition of JR that he as a consequence, failed to
exercise lack of precaution which eventually led to JR's death.
Q. So, you are saying then that in order to rule out acute appendicitis
there must be an operation, that is right Doctor? To be sure, whether or not a physician has committed an "inexcusable
lack of precaution" in the treatment of his patient is to be determined
according to the standard of care observed by other members of the
A. No, sir. If your diagnosis is toreally determine if it is an acute profession in good standing under similar circumstances bearing in
appendicitis, you have to operate.21 mind the advanced state of the profession at the time of treatment or
the present state of medical science. In accepting a case, a doctor in
xxxx effect represents that, having the needed training and skill possessed
by physicians and surgeons practicing in the same field, he will employ
such training, care and skill in the treatment of his patients. He,
Q. Now Doctor, considering the infection, considering that there was a therefore, has a duty to use at least the same level of care that any
[symptom] that causes pain, considering that JR likewise was feverish other reasonably competent doctor would use to treat a condition
and that he was vomiting, does that not show a disease of acute under the same circumstances.26 Sadly, Dr. Ynzon did not display that
appendicitis Doctor? degree of care and precaution demanded by the circumstances.

A. Its possible. AS TO DR. CABUGAO'S LIABILITY:

Q. So that if that is possible, are we getting the impression then Doctor Every criminal conviction requires of the prosecution to prove two
what you have earlier mentioned that the only way to rule out the things — the fact of the crime, i.e., the presence of all the elements of
suspect which is acute appendicitis is by surgery, you have said that the crime for which the accused stands charged, and the fact that the
earlier Doctor, I just want any confirmation of it? accused is the perpetrator of the crime. Based on the above
disquisitions, however, the prosecution failed to prove these two things.
A. Yes, sir.22 The Court is not convinced with moral certainty that Dr. Cabugao
isguilty of reckless imprudence as the elements thereof were not
proven by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt.
Verily, whether a physician or surgeon has exercised the requisite
degree of skill and care in the treatment of his patient is, in the
generality of cases, a matter of expert opinion. The deference of courts Both the trial court and the appellate court bewail the failure to perform
to the expert opinions of qualified physicians stems from its realization appendectomy on JR, or the failure to determine the source of infection
that the latter possess unusual technical skills which laymen in most which caused the deterioration of JR's condition. However, a review of
instances are incapable of intelligently evaluating.23 From the the records fail to show that Dr. Cabugao is in any position to perform
testimonies of the expert witnesses presented, it was irrefutably proven the required appendectomy.
that Dr. Ynzon failed to practice that degree of skill and care required in
the treatment of his patient. Immediately apparent from a review of the records of this case is the
fact that Dr. Cabugao is not a surgeon,but a general practitioner
As correctly observed by the appellate court, Dr. Ynzon revealed want specializing in family medicine;27 thus, even if he wanted to, he cannot
of reasonable skill and care in attending to the needs of JR by do an operation, much less an appendectomy on JR. It is precisely for
neglecting to monitor effectively the developmentsand changes on JR's this reason why he referred JR to Dr. Ynzon after he suspected
condition during the observation period, and to act upon the situation appendicitis. Dr. Mateo, the prosecution’s expert witness, emphasized
after the 24-hour period when his abdominal pain persisted and his the role of the surgeon during direct examination, to wit:
condition worsened. Lamentable, Dr. Ynzon appeared to have visited
JRbriefly only during regular rounds in the mornings. He was not there ATTY. MARTEJA:
Q. You had mentioned that under this circumstances and condition, Neither do we find evidence that Dr. Cabugao has been negligent or
you have mentioned that surgery is the solution, would you have lacked the necessary precaution in his performance of his duty as a
allowed then a 24 hour observation? family doctor. On the contrary, a perusal ofthe medical records would
show that during the 24-hour monitoring on JR, it was Dr. Cabugao
who frequently made orders on the administration of antibiotics and
A. If there is a lingering doubt, inshort period of observation of 18-24
pain relievers. There was also repetitive instructions from Dr. Cabugao
hours can be allowed provided that there would be close monitoring of
to refer JR to Dr. Ynzon as it appeared that he is suspecting
the patient, sir.
appendicitis. The referral of JR to Dr. Ynzon, a surgeon, is actually an
exercise of precaution as he knew that appendicitis is not within his
Q. Would you please tell us who would be doing the monitoring doctor? scope of expertise. This clearly showed that he employed the best of
his knowledge and skill in attending to JR's condition, even after the
referral of JR to Dr. Ynzon. To be sure, the calculated assessment of
A. The best person should be the first examiner, the best surgeon, sir. Dr. Cabugao to refer JRto a surgeon who has sufficient training and
experience to handle JR’s case belies the finding that he displayed
Q. So that would you say that it is incumbent on the surgeon attending inexcusable lack of precaution in handling his patient.31
to the case to have been the one to observe within the period of
observation? We likewise note that Dr. Cabugao was out of town when JR's
condition began to deteriorate. Even so, before he left, he made
A. Yes, because he will be in the best position to observe the sudden endorsement and notified the resident-doctor and nurses-on-duty that
changes in the condition of the patient, sir. he will be on leave.

Q. And how often would in your experience doctor, how often would Moreover, while both appeared to be the attending physicians of JR
the surgeon re-assist (sic) the condition of the patient during the period during his hospital confinement, it cannot be said that the finding of
of observation? guilt on Dr. Ynzon necessitates the same finding on the co-accused Dr.
Cabugao. Conspiracy is inconsistent with the idea of a felony
committed by means of culpa. 32 Thus, the accused-doctors to be found
A. Most foreign authors would recommend every four (4) hours, some guilty of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, it must be shown
centers will recommend hourly or every two hours but here in the that both accused-doctors demonstratedan act executed without
Philippines, would recommend for 4 to 6 hours, sir.28 malice or criminal intent – but with lack of foresight, carelessness, or
negligence. Noteworthy, the evidence on record clearly points to the
Dr. Cabugao’s supervision does not cease upon his endorsement of reckless imprudence of Dr. Ynzon; however, the same cannot be said
his patient to the surgeon. Here, Dr. Cabugao has shown to have in Dr. Cabugao's case.
exerted all efforts to monitor his patient and under these circumstances
he did not have any cause to doubt Dr. Ynzon’s competence and AS TO CIVIL LIABILITY
diligence. Expert testimonies have been offered to prove the
circumstances surrounding the case of JR and the need to perform an
operation. Defense witness, Dr. Villaflor, on cross examination testified, While this case is pending appeal, counsel for petitioner Dr. Ynzon
to wit: informed the Court that the latter died on December 23, 2011 due to
"multiorgan failure" as evidenced by a copy of death certificate.33 Thus,
the effect of death, pending appeal of his conviction of petitioner Dr.
Q. Isn't it a fact that torule out acute appendicitis as notthe disease of Ynzon with regard to his criminal and pecuniary liabilities should be in
JR, surgery or operation mustbe done, isn't it Doctor? accordance to People v. Bayotas,34 wherein the Court laid down the
rules in case the accused dies prior to final judgment:
A. You have to [correlate] all the findings.
1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction
Q. Is it yes or no, Doctor? extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability
based solely thereon. As opined by Justice Regalado, in this
regard, "the death of the accused prior to final judgment
A. Yes. terminates his criminal liability and only the civil liability
directly arising from and based solely on the offense
Q. So, you are saying then that in order to rule out acute appendicitis committed, i.e.,civil liability ex delictoin senso strictiore."
there must be an operation, that is right Doctor?
2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives
A. No, sir. If your diagnosis is to really determine if it is an acute notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also
appendicitis, you have to operate.29 be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict.
Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these other
sources of obligation fromwhich the civil liability may arise as
xxxx a result of the same act or omission:

Q. Now Doctor, considering the infection, considering that there was a a) Law
[symptom] that causes pain, considering that JR likewise was feverish
and that he was vomitting, does that not show a disease of acute
appendicitis Doctor? b) Contracts

A. It’s possible. c) Quasi-contracts

Q. So that if that is possible, are we getting the impression then Doctor d) x x x x x x x x x

what you have earlier mentioned that the only way to rule out the
suspect which is acute appendicitis is by surgery, you have said that e) Quasi-delicts
earlier Doctor, I just want any confirmation of it?

3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2

A. Yes, sir.30 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but
only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to
Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal
 Procedure as amended. This separate civil action may be Section 5. Claims which must be filed under the notice. If not filed,
enforced either againstthe executor/administrator or the barred; exceptions. — All claims for money against the decent, arising
estate of the accused, depending on the source of obligation from contract, express or implied, whether the same be due, not due,
upon which the same is based as explained above. or contingent, all claims for funeral expenses and expense for the last
sickness of the decedent, and judgment for money against the decent,
must be filed within the time limited in the notice; otherwise they are
4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a
barred forever, except that they may be set forth as counterclaims in
forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by
any action that the executor or administrator may bring against the
prescription, in cases where during the prosecution of the
claimants. Where an executor or administrator commencesan action,
criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private-offended
or prosecutes an action already commenced by the deceased in his
party instituted together therewith the civil action. In such
lifetime, the debtor may set forth by answer the claims he has against
case, the statute of limitationson the civil liability is deemed
the decedent, instead of presenting them independently to the court as
interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case,
herein provided, and mutual claims may be set off against each other
conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil Code,
in such action; and if final judgment is rendered in favor of the
that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a possible
defendant, the amount so determined shall be considered the true
privation of right by prescription.35
balance against the estate, as though the claim had been presented
directly beforethe court in the administration proceedings. Claims not
In view of the foregoing, it is clear that the death of the accused Dr. yet due, or contingent, may be approved at their present value.
Ynzon pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal
liability. However, the recovery of civil liability subsists as the same is
As a final note, we reiterate thatthe policy against double recovery
not based on delictbut by contract and the reckless imprudence he was
requires that only one action be maintained for the same act or
guilty of under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code.1âwphi1 For this
omission whether the action is brought against the executor or
reason, a separate civil action may be enforced either against the
administrator, or the estate.39 The heirs of JR must choose which of the
executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending on the
available causes of action for damages they will bring.
source of obligation upon which the same is based, 36 and in
accordance with Section 4, Rule 111 of the Rules on Criminal
Procedure, we quote: WHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner DR. ANTONIO P.
CABUGAO is hereby ACQUITTEDof the crime of reckless imprudence
resulting to homicide.
Sec. 4. Effect of death on civil actions. – The death of the accused
after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action shall
extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict. However, the Due to the death of accused Dr. Clenio Ynzon prior to the disposition of
independent civil action instituted under section 3 of this Rule or which this case, his criminal liability is extinguished; however, his civil liability
thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of subsists. A separate civil action may be filed either against the
obligation may be continued against the estate or legal representative executor/administrator, or the estateof Dr. Ynzon, depending on the
of the accused after proper substitution or against said estate, as the source of obligation upon which the same are based.
case may be. The heirs of the accused may besubstituted for the
deceased without requiring the appointment of an executor or
SO ORDERED.
administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the
minor heirs.

The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or

representatives to appear and be substituted within a period of thirty
(30) days from notice.

A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party shall be

enforced in the manner especially provided in these rules for
prosecuting claims against the estate of the deceased.

If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be dismissed

without prejudice to any civil action the offended party may file against
the estate of the deceased. (Emphases ours)

In sum, upon the extinction of the criminal liability and the offended
party desires to recover damages from the same act or omission
complained of, the party may file a separate civil action based on the
other sources of obligation in accordance with Section 4, Rule 111. 37 If
the same act or omission complained of arises from quasi-delict,as in
this case, a separate civil action must be filed against the executor or
administrator of the estate of the accused, pursuant to Section 1, Rule
87 of the Rules of Court:38

Section 1. Actions which may and which may not be brought against
executor or administrator. — No action upon a claim for the recovery of
money or debtor interest thereon shall be commenced against the
executor or administrator; but to recover real or personal property, or
an interest therein, from the estate, or to enforce a lien thereon, and
actions to recover damages for an injury to person or property, real or
personal, may be commenced against him. (Emphases ours)

Conversely, if the offended party desires to recover damages from the

same act or omission complained of arising from contract, the filing of a
separate civil action must be filed against the estate, pursuant to
Section 5, Rule 86 of the Rules of Court, to wit: