e. Presentation of Evidence

8/18/2019 e. Presentation of Evidence

1/95

EN BANC[G.R. No. 146697. July 23, 2002]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LEONAR O FA!RE y

"I#ENTE, $ ccused-appellant.

E # I S I O N

"IT%G, J. &

Leonardo Fabre was adjudged guilty by the Regional Trial Court, Br. VI, o !ros"eridad, Agusan del #ur, o ra"ing his own daughter $arilou Fabre, and he wassenten%ed to su er the e&tre'e "enalty o death.

Fabre was indi%ted in an In or'ation that read( )*+

That on or about (-- o%lo% in the a ternoon o A"ril /0, *112 in the house othe a%%used lo%ated at $anat, Trento, Agusan del #ur, !hili""ines and withinthe jurisdi%tion o this 3onorable Court, the abo4e5na'ed a%%used by or%e,threats and inti'idation, with lewd design, did then and there will ully,unlaw ully and eloniously su%%eed in ha4ing se&ual inter%ourse with his owndaughter $ARIL67 FABRE, a girl thirteen 8*9: years o age, o goodre"utation, against her will and %onsent to the da'age and "rejudi%e o thesaid 4i%ti' %onsisting o 'oral, a%tual and %o'"ensatory da'ages.

A%%used "leaded not guilty to the %ri'e %harged. At the trial, the "rose%ution"resented the testi'ony o $arilou, that o Adela Fabre, her 'other and the wi e o thea%%used, and that o ;r. Reinerio 3EREF6RE, the Court inds a%%used LE6NAR;6 FABRE y VICENTEalias Nardo, ?7ILT@ beyond reasonable doubt as "rin%i"al o the %ri'e oRA!E as de ined and "enali ed under Arti%le 992 o the Re4ised !enal Code

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn1


2/95

as a'ended by R.A. No. 021 #e%tion ** thereo and hereby i'"oses u"onthe a%%used Leonardo Fabre y Vi%ente alias Nardo the "enalty o ;EAT3 to"ay the 4i%ti' $arilou Fabre %i4il inde'nity in the a'ount o FIFT@T367#AN; 8!2-,---.--: !E#6# and the %osts. )9+

In this auto'ati% re4iew, the %on4i%ted a%%used assigned the ollowing allegederrors %o''itted by the %ourt a quo.

I

T3E TRIAL C67RT ?RAVEL@ ERRE; IN N6T ?IVIN? CRE;ENCE T6 ACC7#E;5A!!ELLANT# ;EFEN#E 6F ALIBI AN; ;ENIAL.

II

A##7$IN? IN AR?7EN;6 T3AT ACC7#E;5A!!ELLANT I# ?7ILT@, T3E

TRIAL C67RT ?RAVEL@ ERRE; IN I$!6#IN? T3E ;EAT3 #ENTENCE7!6N ACC7#E;5A!!ELLANT ;E#!ITE T3E FAIL7RE 6F T3E!R6#EC7TI6N T6 E#TABLI#3 T3E ACT7AL A?E 6F $ARIL67 FABRE

AT T3E TI$E 6F T3E C6$$I##I6N 6F T3E ALLE?E; RA!E. ) +

The de ense argues, rather des"erately, that the testi'ony o a""ellant shoulda%=uire added strength or the ailure o the "rose%ution to %ondu%t %ross5e&a'inationon hi' and to "resent any rebuttal e4iden%e. The %ross5e&a'ination o a witness is a"rerogati4e o the "arty against who' the witness is %alled. )2+ The "ur"ose o %ross5e&a'ination is to test the truth or a%%ura%y o the state'ents o a witness 'ade ondire%t e&a'ination. )0+ The "arty against who' the witness testi ies 'ay dee' any urther e&a'ination unne%essary and instead rely on any other e4iden%e thereto ore addu%edor therea ter to be addu%ed or on what would be belie4ed is the "er%e"tion o the %ourtthereon. Certainly, the trial %ourt is not bound to gi4e ull weight to the testi'ony o awitness on dire%t e&a'ination 'erely be%ause he is not %ross5e&a'ined by the other "arty.

The alibi o a""ellant itsel would not a""ear to be deser4ing o serious%onsideration.3is a%%ount that at the ti'e o the alleged ra"e he was wor ing at a%o%onut "lantation, just about one ilo'eter away ro' the "la%e o the %ri'e, hardlywould a'ount to 'u%h. Nor would the testi'ony o Adela Fabre, his wi e, 'erit anybetter regard. At irst, she testi ied that on the day o the ra"e in%ident, she had le t their

house at our o%lo% in the a ternoon.Later, howe4er, she %hanged her story by sayingthat she had le t the house in the 'orning and returned only at ten o%lo% that sa'e'orning, staying ho'e the whole day therea ter. In any e4ent, in order that alibi 'ight"ros"er, it would not be enough or an a%%used to "ro4e that he was so'ewhere elsewhen the %ri'e was %o''itted he would ha4e to de'onstrate li ewise that he %ouldnot ha4e been "hysi%ally "resent at the "la%e o the %ri'e or in its i''ediate 4i%inity atthe ti'e o its %o''ission. ) + Clearly, in the instant %ase, it was not at all i'"ossible nor e4en i'"robable or a""ellant to ha4e been at the %ri'e s%ene.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn7


3/95

7"on the other hand, the e4idently %andid and straight orward testi'ony o $ariloushould be 'ore than enough to rebut the %lai' o inno%en%e 'ade by a""ellant. )D+

6n /0 A"ril *112, around our o%lo% in the a ternoon, $arilou Fabre was alone intheir house in Barangay $anat, Trento, Agusan del #ur. Adela Fabre, her 'other, hadgone to !uro to buy ish while her siblings were out strolling. A ter %leaning their yard, $arilou went to the adja%ent "al' "lantation, about ourteen to i teen 'etersaway ro' their house, to gather "al' oil. $arilou had been gathering "al' oil or abouta 'inute when her ather, a""ellant Leonardo Fabre, arri4ed. 3e suddenly gri""ed$arilous hands and or%ibly dragged her towards the house. 3e %losed the door andre'o4ed his daughters underwear.3e too o his "ants and as ed $arilou to hold hisse& organ. In tears, $arilou obeyed her ather. 3e then began tou%hing the girls breastsand 4agina. 3e or%ed her to lie down, 'ounted her and sought to insert his "enis intoher organ. $arilou %ried in "ain. >hen a ter so'e ti'e he still %ould not insert his "enisinto $arilous 4agina, he a""lied %o%onut oil to lubri%ate his and his daughters se&ualorgans. 3e was inally able to "enetrate her. 6n%e inside her, a""ellant 'ade "ush and"ull 'o4e'ents until he was through with her. A""ellant threatened to ill her i shewould tell anybody about the se&ual en%ounter. The young girls 'other, Adela Fabre,arri4ed ho'e about i4e o%lo% that a ternoon but, re'e'bering her athers threats, she

e"t 'u' about her ordeal.

The %redibility o $arilou would not be all that di i%ult to dis%ern ro' her narrationthat, as so des%ribed by the "rose%ution, was ull o gra"hi% details whi%h a young"ro4in%ial girl %ould not "ossibly ha4e %on%o%ted and whi%h %ould only ha4e %o'e ro'so'eone who 'ust ha4e "ersonally e&"erien%ed a brutal ra"e assault. #he testi ied(

!R6#. ENRI 7E (

Now, $iss $arilou, %an you re%all where were you on A"ril /0, *112 at about (-- o%lo%in the a ternoonG

A @es, sir.

>here were you that ti'eG

A In our house, sir.

>hat were you doing in your houseG

A I was %leaning our yard, sir.

3ow ar is your yard where you were doing so'e wor s ro' your houseG

A 8>itness "ointing a distan%e o around / to 9 'eters.:

Now, while you were doing your wor in your yard, %an you re%all i there was an in%identthat o%%urredG

A @es, sir.

>hat was that in%ident that o%%urredG

A >hile I was gathering a "al' oil 'y ather arri4ed and suddenly dragged 'e to our house,sir.

C67RT(

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jul2002/146697.htm#_edn8


4/95

>here is your house lo%atedG

A At !uro , $anat, Trento, Agusan del #ur, @our 3onor.

!R6#. ENRI 7E (

>hat did you do when your ather dragged you to your houseG

A Be%ause I was dragged by 'y ather to our house I just went with hi', sir.

>hile you were in your house a ter ha4ing been dragged by your ather, what ha""ened ianyG

A 3e %losed our house and he re'o4ed 'y "anty, sir.

And a ter re'o4ing your "anty, what did your ather do ne&tG

A 3e re'o4ed his "ants and he let 'e hold his "enis, sir.

And what did you do ne&t a ter holding his "enisG

A I was %rying, sir.

>hile you were %rying what did your ather doG

A 3e was tou%hing 'y breast and 'y 4agina, sir.

A ter that what did he do ne&tG

A 3e let 'e lie down, sir.

And while lying down, what did your ather doG

A 3e 'ounted 'e and he inserted his "enis, to 'y 4agina, sir.

And what did you eel while your ather was inserting his "enis to your 4aginaG

A Very "ain ul, sir.

And what did you do while your ather was inserting his "enis to your 4aginaG

A I was %rying, sir.

And while you were %rying what did your ather do i anyG

A 3e told 'e not to tell anybody be%ause i I will do it he will ill 'e, sir.

Now, did your ather ind it easy to insert his "enis to your 4aginaG

A It )too + a long ti'e, sir.

And did he use anything to a%ilitate the insertion o his "enis to your 4aginaG

A @es, sir. >hat was thatG

A 3e used %o%onut oil in his "enis and also in 'y 4agina so that his "enis %an easily insert'y 4agina, sir.

Now, while his "enis was in your 4agina, %an you tell this 3onorable Court i he didanything also on to" o you and while his "enis was inside your 4aginaG

A None, sir.


5/95

;id he 'a e any 'o4e'entG

A @es, sir.

>hat was that 'o4e'entG

A 3e 'ade a "ush and "ull 'o4e'ent on 'y body, sir.

Now, while your ather was doing it to you where was your 'other that ti'eG

A #he was in !uro , $anat, Trento, Agusan del #ur, sir.

And did you re"ort this in%ident to your 'otherG

A Not yet sir be%ause he told 'e not to tell anybody.

#o when did you had a %han%e to tell your 'other about this in%identG

A 6n $ay *, *112, sir.

And what did your 'other do a ter you re"orted to her this in%identG

A #he re"orted )the 'atter+ to the Hagawad, sir. )1+

It has been stressed =uite o ten enough that the testi'ony o a ra"e 4i%ti', who isyoung and still i''ature, deser4es aith and %reden%e )*-+ or it si'"ly would be unnatural

or a young and inno%ent girl to in4ent a story o de loration, allow an e&a'ination o her "ri4ate "arts and therea ter subje%t hersel and her a'ily to the trau'a o a "ubli% trialunless she indeed has s"o en the truth. )**+ $ost es"e%ially, a daughter would not a%%useher own ather o su%h a serious o ense or allow hersel to be "er4erted i she were nottruly 'oti4ated by a desire to see a just retribution or a 4iolation bra enly %o''ittedagainst her. )*/+

Con ir'ing $arilous story was the 'edi%al re"ort and testi'ony o ;r. Reinerio


6/95

%onsanguinity or a inity within the third %i4il degree, or the%o''on5law5s"ouse o the "arent o the 4i%ti'.

>hile the ather5daughter relationshi" between a""ellant and "ri4ate %o'"lainanthas been su i%iently established, the a%t o 'inority o the 4i%ti', although s"e%i i%ally

a4erred in the in or'ation, has not been e=ually shown in e4iden%e. These =uali ying%ir%u'stan%es o relationshi" and 'inority are twin re=uire'ents that should be bothalleged in the in or'ation and established beyond reasonable doubt during trial in order to sustain an i'"osition o the death "enalty. )* + Neither an ob4ious 'inority o the 4i%ti'nor the ailure o the de ense to %ontest her real age always e&%use the "rose%ution

ro' the desired "roo re=uired by law. )*2+


7/95

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 142((6. F)*+u$+y (, 2003]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JES%S PERE ySE!%NGA, accused-appellant .

E # I S I O NPER CURIAM &

For auto'ati% re4iew is the ;e%ision )*+ dated 6%tober /0, *111 o the Regional TrialCourt o Iba, a'bales, Bran%h 01, in Cri'inal Case No. RTC5/**05I, inding a""ellant


8/95

/. That after the incident, the child %a$ $ub&ected to a #edico legal e+a#ination to%hich a #edico legal certificate %a$ i$$ued by r. ditha i!ino.

The pro$ecution #ar3ed in e!idence the birth certificate of the !icti# Mayia 4.on$eca a$ +hibit 5, and the #edico legal certificate i$$ued by r. ditha i!ino a$+hibit B. 6

Therea ter, trial ensued. The "rose%ution "resented the ollowing witnesses( the4i%ti', $ayia !onse%a the 4i%ti's 'other, 3er'ie !onse%a the 4i%ti's ather, 6sias!onse%a Virginia Es"ejo ?iron and ;r. Editha dela Cru ;i4ino. 6n the other hand, thede ense "resented a""ellant and his e'"loyer, Bartolo'e Tolentino.

The 6 i%e o the #oli%itor ?eneral 86#? or bre4ity: su''ari ed the "rose%utions4ersion o the in%ident in the a""ellees brie , to wit(

4n January 17, 1997, about noonti#e, in Sitio Baco, Barangay Macarang, alauig,

"a#bale$, $i+ year old Mayia on$eca %a$ %al3ing along Sulo3 on her %ay to herhou$e in Sitio (a#iling %hen appellant Je$u$ Sebunga ere8 approached her )pp. 7 ,TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. 5ppellant introduced hi#$elf a$ Johnny and i##ediatelyafter%ard$, $trangled her nec3 and bo+ed her abdo#en )p. 10, TS , ece#ber 1;,199 *. Still in $hoc3, Mayia fell do%n )id.*. 5t that point, a dog arri!ed and bar3ed atthe#.

5ppellant then proceeded to lo%er hi$ blac3 deni# pant$ %hile $i#ultaneou$lyre#o!ing Mayia$ panty. 'e then in$erted hi$ peni$ in$ide Mayia$ !agina )p. 11, id.*.Mayia felt e+cruciating pain in her pri!ate part$ )$ic* but %a$ not able to repel her

aggre$$or %ho$e $trength and %eight totally engulfed her. 'er only recour$e %a$ tocry %hile her young body %a$ being ra!i$hed )p. 1 , id.*.

5fter $ati$fying hi$ bea$tly de$ire$, appellant rai$ed hi$ pant$ and ran a%ay )p. 1/, id.*. ot%ith$tanding that her !agina %a$ bleeding profu$ely and her dre$$ no% co!ered%ith her o%n blood, Mayia #anaged to $tand up and $ee3 help. She ran to the hou$eof n fact, =iron %a$ out$ide %hen $he heard her dog bar3ing )apparently, it %a$the $a#e dog bar3ing at appellant %hile he %a$ con$u##ating hi$ lu$t on Mayia, pp.2 , TS , January 12, 1999- p. 11, TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. ?oo3ing at thedirection of the noi$e, $he $a% a confu$ed Mayia approaching her %ith blood drippingfro# her pri!ate part$ and thigh$. @hen =iron a$3ed Mayia %hat happened, the latter$houted ni rape a3o, ni rape a3o )p. /, TS , January /, 1999*. =iron then $u##onedher hu$band and other co#panion$ to loo3 for Mayia$ attac3er but %a$ unable to findhi#. =iron then proceeded to 'er#ie on$eca and 4$ia$ on$eca, Mayia$ parent$, toinfor# the# of %hat happened )p. ;, TS , January ;, 1999- p. 2, TS , January 19,1999*.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn6


9/95

@hen her parent$ a$3ed Mayia if $he 3ne% her a$$ailant, the latter an$%ered the na#eJohnny. )id.* The couple brought their daughter to the re$ident Aa#on Mag$ay$ayMe#orial 'o$pital for #edical e+a#ination )p. 2, TS , ebruary 2/, 1999*. She %a$e+a#ined by ra. ditha ela (ru8 i!ino, %ho i$$ued a #edico legal certificatedated January 2 , 1997 $tating the follo%ing:

a. Bleeding of genitalia co#ing fro# #edian laceration at the !aginal flooraround four )/* centi#eter$ in $i8e. o$$ible cau$e, a fall and thenhitting a $harp ob&ect and al$o an alleged $e+ual a$$ault )p. /,TS , ebruary 2/, 1999*.

b. =enitalia had hy#enal laceration$ at , , 9 and 12 ocloc3 po$ition$.

)pp. / id.*

Becau$e of the e+tent of the da#age on her genital$, Mayia undertoo3 an >< $edationoperation to repair her laceration$ )p. , id.* uring her confine#ent at the ho$pital,the on$eca couple reported the incident to the alauig olice Station andrecounted their daughter$ narration including the na#e of the culprit a$ Johnny %ho,according to their neighbor$, %a$ a %or3er at the fi$hpond of Bartolo#e Tolentino)pp. 11 12, TS , January ;, 1999*. olice operati!e$ then proceeded to the $aidfi$hpond and arre$ted appellant. 5fter her di$charge fro# the ho$pital, Mayia learnedthat appellant %a$ already apprehended )pp. , TS , January ;, 1999*. >n the police$tation, $he %a$ able to po$iti!ely identify the appellant a$ the per$on %ho $e+uallya$$aulted her )p. 1 , TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. 67

A""ellant denied ra"ing $ayia. A""ellant testi ied that on the date o the allegedra"e in%ident, he was wor ing at a ish"ond at $a%arang, a'bales. 3e heard o thera"e o a young girl ro' his 'anager, Bartolo'e Tolentino 8Tolentino or bre4ity:.)D+ A""ellant urther testi ied that on


10/95

A ter trial, the %ourt a quo rendered judg'ent )*/+ on 6%tober /0, *111, the dis"ositi4e"ortion o whi%h reads(

@' A 4A , foregoing con$idered, accu$ed Je$u$ ere8 y Sabung )S>(* i$ found=C>?TD beyond rea$onable doubt of the cri#e of Statutore Aape, defined and

penali8ed under 5rticle ; of the Ae!i$ed enal (ode %ith the Eualifyingcircu#$tance that the !icti# %a$ only year$ old at the ti#e of the co##i$$ion of theoffen$e, in relation to Section ; )b*, 5rticle >>>, Aepublic 5ct 7 10, and i$ $entenced to$uffer the penalty of 5T'. Je$u$ ere8 i$ directed to pay to the pri!ate co#plainantthe a#ount of Se!enty i!e Thou$and e$o$ ) 7;,000.00* a$ and by %ay of ci!ilinde#nity and ifty Thou$and ) ;0,000.00* a$ and by %ay of #oral da#age$.

3en%e, this auto'ati% re4iew.

In his brie , a""ellant raises the ollowing lone assign'ent o error(

T' (4CAT 5 FC4 =A5< ?D AA > > > = T'5T T' =C>?T 4T' 5 ??5 T '5S B A4< B D4 A 5S4 5B? 4CBT.

A""ellant %ontends that his identi i%ation in o"en %ourt by $ayia was highlyirregular.A""ellant "oints out that the "rose%utor had already identi ied hi' as the 'anwearing an orange t5shirt when the "rose%utor as ed $ayia to identi y her allegedra"ist. A""ellant stresses that when $ayia identi ied hi' in o"en %ourt, she re erred tohi' as a 'an na'ed


11/95

The Court has re"eatedly stated that it is highly in%on%ei4able or a %hild o tender age, ine&"erien%ed in the ways o the world, to abri%ate a %harge o de loration,undergo a 'edi%al e&a'ination o her "ri4ate "art, subje%t hersel to "ubli% trial, andtarnish her a'ilys honor and re"utation, unless she was 'oti4ated by a strong desire tosee justi%e or the wrong %o''itted against her. )*D+

$ayia re%ounted her harrowing e&"erien%e, thus( >hat ti'e was this when hen he bo&ed you on your sto'a%h, what ha""ened to youG

A I was sho% ed, 'a'.

;id you all downG A Be ore that, I was already lying down, so when he bo&ed 'e, I was sho% ed.

@ou said that you were already lying down. >ho 'ade you lie downG

A The "erson, 'a'.

>hy were you sho% ed, $ayiaG

A Be%ause he strangled 'e and bo&ed 'e.

A ter he bo&ed you on your abdo'en, what ha""enedG >hat else did he do to youG

A There was a dog that arri4ed in the "la%e and it bar ed at us. Then hat was he wearing at that ti'eG

A A bla% deni', 'a'.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn18


12/95

>hen he used his "enis in entering your "ri4ate "art, did he re'o4e his "antsG

A No, 'a'.

>hat did he do with his "antsG

A 3e brought out his "enis, 'a'.

@ou 'ean to say $ayia, he lowered his "antsG

A @es, 'a'.

>hat about you, were you wearing any "antyG

A @es, 'a'.

>hat was your %lothes at that ti'eG

A A dress, 'a'.

>hen his "enis entered your 4agina $ayia, did he re'o4e your "antyG

A @es, 'a' .)*1+

The identity o a""ellant as the ra"ist has been established by the %lear, %on4in%ingand straight orward testi'ony o $ayia. ;uring the trial, she testi ied as ollows(

$ayia, there is a 'an sitting wearing orange t5shirt, do you now this 'anG

A @es, 'a'.

;o you now his na'eG

A @es, 'a'.

>hat is his na'eG

A hy do you now hi'G

A Be%ause he introdu%ed hi'sel to 'e.

>here did he introdu%ed hi'sel to youG

A At #ulo , 'a'.

#ulo is a "la%eG

A @es, 'a'.

;o you ha4e any %o'"anion when this 'an introdu%ed hi'sel to youG

A None, 'a'. 3ow did he introdu%e hi'sel to youG

A The 'an introdu%ed hi'sel to 'e by saying, Hilala 'o ba a oG 3indi "o. A o si


13/95

A @es, sir.

Can you "oint to hi'G

A @es, sir.

!oint to hi'.

A 8>itness "ointing to the "erson sitting at the a%%used ben%h and when as ed o hisna'e answered e are satis ied that her testi'ony, by itsel , is su i%ient identi i%ation o her ra"ist. As held in People v. Ma !ue" '-+

+++. >ndeed, the re!elation of an innocent child %ho$e cha$tity %a$ abu$ed de$er!e$full credit, a$ the %illingne$$ of co#plainant to face police in!e$tigation and toundergo the trouble and hu#iliation of a public trial i$ eloEuent te$ti#ony of the truthof her co#plaint. Stated differently, it i$ #o$t i#probable for a fi!e year old girl oftender year$, $o innocent and $o guilele$$ a$ the herein offended party, to bra8enlyi#pute a cri#e $o $eriou$ a$ rape to any #an if it %ere not true.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/dec2000/137408_10.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/dec2000/137408_10.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn27


14/95

In his Re"ly Brie , a""ellant %ontends that e4en assu'ing that the guilt o a""ellanthas been "ro4en beyond reasonable doubt, the trial %ourt erred in i'"osing the death"enalty.A""ellant 'aintains that the death "enalty %annot be i'"osed on hi' or ailureo the "rose%ution to "ro4e $ayias age by inde"endent e4iden%e. A""ellant "oints outthat while $ayias birth %erti i%ate was duly 'ar ed during the "re5trial, it was not

"resented and identi ied during the trial. A""ellant asserts that $ayias 'inority 'ust notonly be s"e%i i%ally alleged in the In or'ation but 'ust also be established beyondreasonable doubt during the trial.

A""ellants argu'ent deser4es s%ant %onsideration.

At the "re5trial, the "arties 'utually wor ed out a satis a%tory dis"osition o the%ri'inal %ase. A""ellant, assisted by %ounsel, signed a !re5Trial Agree'ent )/D+ whi%h, asin%or"orated in the !re5Trial 6rder, stated that(

+ + +.

. The victim in this case, Mayia P. Ponseca was born on 23 May 1990 asevidenced by her birth certificate;

+ + +. ) #pha$i$ $upplied*

;uring the "re5trial, the "rose%ution 'ar ed in e4iden%e $ayias birth %erti i%ate asE&hibit A.)/1+ The "rose%ution sub'itted its 6 er o E4iden%e )9-+ whi%h in%luded E&hibit A, a%erti ied true %o"y o $ayias birth %erti i%ate. The trial %ourt ad'itted E&hibit A )9*+ withoutany obje%tion ro' the de ense.

The "ur"ose o "re5trial is to %onsider the ollowing( 8a: "lea bargaining 8b:

sti"ulation o a%ts 8%: 'ar ing or identi i%ation o e4iden%e o the "arties 8d: wai4er o obje%tions to ad'issibility o e4iden%e 8e: 'odi i%ation o the order o trial i the a%%usedad'its the %harge but inter"oses law ul de enses and 8 : su%h 'atters as will "ro'ote a

air and e&"editious trial o the %ri'inal and %i4il as"e%ts o the %ase. )9/+ Fa%ts sti"ulatedand e4iden%e ad'itted during "re5trial bind the "arties. #e%tion , Rule **D o theRe4ised Rules o Cri'inal !ro%edure )99+ "ro4ides(

S (. /. Pre-trial order . 5fter the pre trial conference, the court $hall i$$ue an orderreciting the action$ ta3en, the fact$ $tipulated, and e!idence #ar3ed. Such order shabind the !arties , li#it the trial to #atter$ not di$po$ed of, and control the cour$e ofthe action during the trial, unle$$ #odified by the court to pre!ent #anife$t in&u$tice.) #pha$i$ $upplied*

$oreo4er, $ayia hersel testi ied in o"en %ourt as to her age. ;uring the trial on;e%e'ber *2, *11D, whi%h was about twenty5three 8/9: 'onths a ter the ra"e in%idento%%urred on


15/95

indis"utably "ro4en that $ayia was below se4en years old at the ti'e a""ellant ra"edher.

Finally, the trial %ourt was %orre%t in i'"osing the death "enalty on a""ellant. 7nder Arti%le 992)92+ o the Re4ised !enal Code, as a'ended by #e%tion ** o Re"ubli% A%t No.

021, )90+ the death "enalty shall be i'"osed i the %ri'e o ra"e is %o''itted against a%hild below se4en 8 : years old. $ayia was si& 80: years and se4en 8 : 'onths old whena""ellant ra"ed her.

I ra"e is =uali ied by any o the %ir%u'stan%es )9 + warranting the i'"osition o thedeath "enalty, the %i4il inde'nity or a%tual or %o'"ensatory da'ages is 'andatory.)9D+ Following "re4ailing juris"ruden%e, the %i4il inde'nity is i&ed at ! 2,---.--. Inaddition, 'oral da'ages o !2-,---.-- should also be awarded to the ra"e 4i%ti'without need or "leading or "ro4ing it. )91+

'HEREFORE , the ;e%ision dated 6%tober /0, *111 o the Regional Trial Court o Iba, a'bales, Bran%h 01, in Cri'inal Case No. RTC5/**05I, inding a""ellant


16/95

PER CURIAM &

For auto'ati% re4iew is the ;e%ision )*+ dated 6%tober /0, *111 o the Regional TrialCourt o Iba, a'bales, Bran%h 01, in Cri'inal Case No. RTC5/**05I, inding a""ellant


17/95

The 6 i%e o the #oli%itor ?eneral 86#? or bre4ity: su''ari ed the "rose%utions4ersion o the in%ident in the a""ellees brie , to wit(

4n January 17, 1997, about noonti#e, in Sitio Baco, Barangay Macarang, alauig,"a#bale$, $i+ year old Mayia on$eca %a$ %al3ing along Sulo3 on her %ay to her

hou$e in Sitio (a#iling %hen appellant Je$u$ Sebunga ere8 approached her )pp. 7 ,TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. 5ppellant introduced hi#$elf a$ Johnny and i##ediatelyafter%ard$, $trangled her nec3 and bo+ed her abdo#en )p. 10, TS , ece#ber 1;,199 *. Still in $hoc3, Mayia fell do%n )id.*. 5t that point, a dog arri!ed and bar3ed atthe#.

5ppellant then proceeded to lo%er hi$ blac3 deni# pant$ %hile $i#ultaneou$lyre#o!ing Mayia$ panty. 'e then in$erted hi$ peni$ in$ide Mayia$ !agina )p. 11, id.*.Mayia felt e+cruciating pain in her pri!ate part$ )$ic* but %a$ not able to repel heraggre$$or %ho$e $trength and %eight totally engulfed her. 'er only recour$e %a$ tocry %hile her young body %a$ being ra!i$hed )p. 1 , id.*.

5fter $ati$fying hi$ bea$tly de$ire$, appellant rai$ed hi$ pant$ and ran a%ay )p. 1/, id.*. ot%ith$tanding that her !agina %a$ bleeding profu$ely and her dre$$ no% co!ered%ith her o%n blood, Mayia #anaged to $tand up and $ee3 help. She ran to the hou$eof n fact, =iron %a$ out$ide %hen $he heard her dog bar3ing )apparently, it %a$the $a#e dog bar3ing at appellant %hile he %a$ con$u##ating hi$ lu$t on Mayia, pp.2 , TS , January 12, 1999- p. 11, TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. ?oo3ing at thedirection of the noi$e, $he $a% a confu$ed Mayia approaching her %ith blood drippingfro# her pri!ate part$ and thigh$. @hen =iron a$3ed Mayia %hat happened, the latter$houted ni rape a3o, ni rape a3o )p. /, TS , January /, 1999*. =iron then $u##onedher hu$band and other co#panion$ to loo3 for Mayia$ attac3er but %a$ unable to findhi#. =iron then proceeded to 'er#ie on$eca and 4$ia$ on$eca, Mayia$ parent$, toinfor# the# of %hat happened )p. ;, TS , January ;, 1999- p. 2, TS , January 19,1999*.

@hen her parent$ a$3ed Mayia if $he 3ne% her a$$ailant, the latter an$%ered the na#eJohnny. )id.* The couple brought their daughter to the re$ident Aa#on Mag$ay$ayMe#orial 'o$pital for #edical e+a#ination )p. 2, TS , ebruary 2/, 1999*. She %a$e+a#ined by ra. ditha ela (ru8 i!ino, %ho i$$ued a #edico legal certificatedated January 2 , 1997 $tating the follo%ing:

a. Bleeding of genitalia co#ing fro# #edian laceration at the !aginal flooraround four )/* centi#eter$ in $i8e. o$$ible cau$e, a fall and thenhitting a $harp ob&ect and al$o an alleged $e+ual a$$ault )p. /,TS , ebruary 2/, 1999*.


18/95

b. =enitalia had hy#enal laceration$ at , , 9 and 12 ocloc3 po$ition$.

)pp. / id.*

Becau$e of the e+tent of the da#age on her genital$, Mayia undertoo3 an >< $edationoperation to repair her laceration$ )p. , id.* uring her confine#ent at the ho$pital,the on$eca couple reported the incident to the alauig olice Station andrecounted their daughter$ narration including the na#e of the culprit a$ Johnny %ho,according to their neighbor$, %a$ a %or3er at the fi$hpond of Bartolo#e Tolentino)pp. 11 12, TS , January ;, 1999*. olice operati!e$ then proceeded to the $aidfi$hpond and arre$ted appellant. 5fter her di$charge fro# the ho$pital, Mayia learnedthat appellant %a$ already apprehended )pp. , TS , January ;, 1999*. >n the police$tation, $he %a$ able to po$iti!ely identify the appellant a$ the per$on %ho $e+uallya$$aulted her )p. 1 , TS , ece#ber 1;, 199 *. 67

A""ellant denied ra"ing $ayia. A""ellant testi ied that on the date o the allegedra"e in%ident, he was wor ing at a ish"ond at $a%arang, a'bales. 3e heard o thera"e o a young girl ro' his 'anager, Bartolo'e Tolentino 8Tolentino or bre4ity:.)D+ A""ellant urther testi ied that on


19/95

3en%e, this auto'ati% re4iew.

In his brie , a""ellant raises the ollowing lone assign'ent o error(

T' (4CAT 5 FC4 =A5< ?D AA > > > = T'5T T' =C>?T 4T' 5 ??5 T '5S B A4< B D4 A 5S4 5B? 4CBT.

A""ellant %ontends that his identi i%ation in o"en %ourt by $ayia was highlyirregular.A""ellant "oints out that the "rose%utor had already identi ied hi' as the 'anwearing an orange t5shirt when the "rose%utor as ed $ayia to identi y her allegedra"ist. A""ellant stresses that when $ayia identi ied hi' in o"en %ourt, she re erred tohi' as a 'an na'ed


20/95

A Noonti'e, 'a'.

#o, when hen he bo&ed you on your sto'a%h, what ha""ened to youG

A I was sho% ed, 'a'.

;id you all downG

A Be ore that, I was already lying down, so when he bo&ed 'e, I was sho% ed.

@ou said that you were already lying down. >ho 'ade you lie downG

A The "erson, 'a'.

>hy were you sho% ed, $ayiaG

A Be%ause he strangled 'e and bo&ed 'e.

A ter he bo&ed you on your abdo'en, what ha""enedG >hat else did he do to youG

A There was a dog that arri4ed in the "la%e and it bar ed at us. Then hat was he wearing at that ti'eG

A A bla% deni', 'a'.

>hen he used his "enis in entering your "ri4ate "art, did he re'o4e his "antsG

A No, 'a'.

>hat did he do with his "antsG A 3e brought out his "enis, 'a'.

@ou 'ean to say $ayia, he lowered his "antsG

A @es, 'a'.

>hat about you, were you wearing any "antyG

A @es, 'a'.


21/95

>hat was your %lothes at that ti'eG

A A dress, 'a'.

>hen his "enis entered your 4agina $ayia, did he re'o4e your "antyG

A @es, 'a' .)*1+

The identity o a""ellant as the ra"ist has been established by the %lear, %on4in%ingand straight orward testi'ony o $ayia. ;uring the trial, she testi ied as ollows(

$ayia, there is a 'an sitting wearing orange t5shirt, do you now this 'anG

A @es, 'a'.

;o you now his na'eG

A @es, 'a'.

>hat is his na'eG

A hy do you now hi'G

A Be%ause he introdu%ed hi'sel to 'e.

>here did he introdu%ed hi'sel to youG

A At #ulo , 'a'.

#ulo is a "la%eG

A @es, 'a'.

;o you ha4e any %o'"anion when this 'an introdu%ed hi'sel to youG

A None, 'a'.

3ow did he introdu%e hi'sel to youG

A The 'an introdu%ed hi'sel to 'e by saying, Hilala 'o ba a oG 3indi "o. A o si


22/95

$ayias si'"le, "ositi4e and straight orward re%ounting on the witness stand o her harrowing e&"erien%e lends %reden%e to her a%%usation. 3er tender age belies anyallegation that her a%%usation was a 'ere in4ention i'"elled by so'e ill5'oti4e. As theCourt has stressed in nu'erous %ases, when a wo'an or a %hild 4i%ti' says that shehas been ra"ed, she in e e%t says all that is ne%essary to show that ra"e was indeed

%o''itted.)//+

$ayia had a %lear sight o a""ellants a%e sin%e the ra"e o%%urred at noonti'e.)/9+ 3er "ro&i'ity to a""ellant during the se&ual assault lea4es no doubt as to the%orre%tness o her identi i%ation or a 'an and wo'an %annot be "hysi%ally %loser toea%h other than during the se&ual a%t. )/ + Thus, e4en i $ayia did not gi4e the identi ying'ar s o a""ellant, her "ositi4e identi i%ation o a""ellant su i%ed to establish %learlythe identity o her se&ual assailant.

A""ellants %lai' that the "oli%e i'"ro"erly suggested to $ayia to identi y a""ellantis without basis. True, $ayia did not identi y a""ellant in a "oli%e line5u" when $ayiaidenti ied a""ellant in his %ell. 3owe4er, a""ellant, in his testi'ony ad'itted that he had

two other %o'"anions in his %ell.)/2+

$oreo4er, the Court has held that there is no lawre=uiring a "oli%e line5u" as essential to a "ro"er identi i%ation. E4en without a "oli%eline5u", there %ould still be a "ro"er identi i%ation as long as the "oli%e did not suggestsu%h identi i%ation to the witnesses. )/0+ The re%ords are bere t o any indi%ation that the"oli%e suggested to $ayia to identi y a""ellant as the ra"ist.

$ayias identi i%ation in o"en %ourt o a""ellant as her ra"ist dis"els any doubt as tothe "ro"er identi i%ation o a""ellant. $ayia "ositi4ely identi ied and "ointed to a""ellantas her ra"ist. >e are satis ied that her testi'ony, by itsel , is su i%ient identi i%ation o her ra"ist. As held in People v. Ma !ue" '-+

+++. >ndeed, the re!elation of an innocent child %ho$e cha$tity %a$ abu$ed de$er!e$full credit, a$ the %illingne$$ of co#plainant to face police in!e$tigation and toundergo the trouble and hu#iliation of a public trial i$ eloEuent te$ti#ony of the truthof her co#plaint. Stated differently, it i$ #o$t i#probable for a fi!e year old girl oftender year$, $o innocent and $o guilele$$ a$ the herein offended party, to bra8enlyi#pute a cri#e $o $eriou$ a$ rape to any #an if it %ere not true.

In his Re"ly Brie , a""ellant %ontends that e4en assu'ing that the guilt o a""ellanthas been "ro4en beyond reasonable doubt, the trial %ourt erred in i'"osing the death"enalty.A""ellant 'aintains that the death "enalty %annot be i'"osed on hi' or ailureo the "rose%ution to "ro4e $ayias age by inde"endent e4iden%e. A""ellant "oints out

that while $ayias birth %erti i%ate was duly 'ar ed during the "re5trial, it was not"resented and identi ied during the trial. A""ellant asserts that $ayias 'inority 'ust notonly be s"e%i i%ally alleged in the In or'ation but 'ust also be established beyondreasonable doubt during the trial.

A""ellants argu'ent deser4es s%ant %onsideration.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/dec2000/137408_10.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/dec2000/137408_10.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/142556.htm#_ftn27


23/95

At the "re5trial, the "arties 'utually wor ed out a satis a%tory dis"osition o the%ri'inal %ase. A""ellant, assisted by %ounsel, signed a !re5Trial Agree'ent )/D+ whi%h, asin%or"orated in the !re5Trial 6rder, stated that(

+ + +.

. The victim in this case, Mayia P. Ponseca was born on 23 May 1990 asevidenced by her birth certificate;

+ + +. ) #pha$i$ $upplied*

;uring the "re5trial, the "rose%ution 'ar ed in e4iden%e $ayias birth %erti i%ate asE&hibit A.)/1+ The "rose%ution sub'itted its 6 er o E4iden%e )9-+ whi%h in%luded E&hibit A, a%erti ied true %o"y o $ayias birth %erti i%ate. The trial %ourt ad'itted E&hibit A )9*+ withoutany obje%tion ro' the de ense.

The "ur"ose o "re5trial is to %onsider the ollowing( 8a: "lea bargaining 8b:sti"ulation o a%ts 8%: 'ar ing or identi i%ation o e4iden%e o the "arties 8d: wai4er o obje%tions to ad'issibility o e4iden%e 8e: 'odi i%ation o the order o trial i the a%%usedad'its the %harge but inter"oses law ul de enses and 8 : su%h 'atters as will "ro'ote a

air and e&"editious trial o the %ri'inal and %i4il as"e%ts o the %ase. )9/+ Fa%ts sti"ulatedand e4iden%e ad'itted during "re5trial bind the "arties. #e%tion , Rule **D o theRe4ised Rules o Cri'inal !ro%edure )99+ "ro4ides(

S (. /. Pre-trial order . 5fter the pre trial conference, the court $hall i$$ue an orderreciting the action$ ta3en, the fact$ $tipulated, and e!idence #ar3ed. Such order shabind the !arties , li#it the trial to #atter$ not di$po$ed of, and control the cour$e ofthe action during the trial, unle$$ #odified by the court to pre!ent #anife$t in&u$tice.) #pha$i$ $upplied*

$oreo4er, $ayia hersel testi ied in o"en %ourt as to her age. ;uring the trial on;e%e'ber *2, *11D, whi%h was about twenty5three 8/9: 'onths a ter the ra"e in%idento%%urred on


24/95

)9D+ Following "re4ailing juris"ruden%e, the %i4il inde'nity is i&ed at ! 2,---.--. Inaddition, 'oral da'ages o !2-,---.-- should also be awarded to the ra"e 4i%ti'without need or "leading or "ro4ing it. )91+

'HEREFORE , the ;e%ision dated 6%tober /0, *111 o the Regional Trial Court o Iba, a'bales, Bran%h 01, in Cri'inal Case No. RTC5/**05I, inding a""ellant


25/95

#EC6N; ;IVI#I6N

[G.R. No. 139412. A-+ l 2, 2003]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. JAI/E#ASTILLANO, SR. $l $ T$l o, RONAL #ASTILLANO $l $No o $ JAI/E #ASTILLANO, JR. $l $ Ju u , accused ,

RONAL #ASTILLANO $l $ No o $ JAI/E #ASTILLANO, JR. $l $Ju u , appellants .

E # I S I O N#ALLEJO, SR., J.:

This is an a""eal ro' the ;e%ision )*+ o the Regional Trial Court o !ili, Ca'arines#ur, Bran%h 9*, in Cri'inal Case No. !5/2 /, %on4i%ting a""ellants Ronald Castillanoalias Nono and


26/95

6n


27/95

turned o4er to the "oli%e in4estigators. The three were "la%ed under arrest or the illingo ;iosdado. The "oli%e'en sub'itted their in4estigation re"ort. )* +

In the 'eanti'e, at (-- a.'., ;r. E4angeline Consola%ion, the $uni%i"al 3ealth6 i%er o Bula, %ondu%ted an auto"sy on the %ada4er o ;iosdado. 3er auto"sy re"ortre4ealed the ollowing indings(

+ternal inding$

1. >nci$e @ound c# Superior pinna A ear

2. >nci$e %oud )$ic* 10 c#. fro# na$al bridge e+tending to #andible A

. Stab %ound 2 c#.+ ; c# . piga$triu# A

/. Stab %ound 2 c#.+ / c#. piga$triu# ?

5. Stab %ound 2.; c#. Middle third 5r# A

. Stab %ound 2c# + ; c#. po$terior Bac3.

7. 5#putating #iddle third finger ?

. 'ac3ed %ound po$terior an3le ?

9. =un$hot %ound 4 2 + 2c#. %ith contu$ion collar #edial a$pect #iddle

third A thigh o point of e+it noted

>nternal inding$:

racture fe#ur %ith oreign body bullet lodge in #iddle third fe#ur %ith he#ato#aabout about 100 cc A thigh

(au$e of eath- 'ypo!ole#ia $econdary to Multiple Stab @ound 61

The do%tor re%o4ered a slug ro' the right thigh o ;iosdado. #he later signed the4i%ti's "ost5'orte' %erti i%ate o death. )*1+ #enior Ins"e%tor Edgardo B. #a'bo, Chie o !oli%e o Bula !oli%e #tation, iled with the $uni%i"al Trial Court o Bula, Ca'arines #ur,a %ri'inal %o'"laint )/-+ or 'urder against the Castillano brothers. )/*+


28/95

6n


29/95

boarded the jee"ney and told Ronald that he was instru%ted by their 'other to go to thehouse o hen


30/95

;iosdado, he ad4ised his sons to loo or a lawyer or legal re"resentation. 3e told thetrial %ourt that at around **(9- ".'., he and his two sons had de%ided to go to

Andangnan in order to 'eet a %ousin o his who new o a lawyer na'ed Atty. Rotor. Asthey tra4ersed the road to Andangan, they were sto""ed by so'e "oli%e'en at a%he% "oint and were in4ited to the "oli%e station where they were in4estigated and

e4entually in%ar%erated.)9D+

?ilda Abes, the last witness or the de ense, a ir'ed that she was the girl riend o


31/95

Anent the irst issue, a""ellant Ronald "osits that he addu%ed "roo that he a%ted insel 5de ense when he stabbed the 4i%ti'.

The Court disagrees with a""ellant Ronald. The Court has %onsistently held that li ealibi, sel 5de ense is inherently wea be%ause it is easy to abri%ate. ) *+ In a %ase wheresel 5de ense and de ense o relati4es is in4o ed by the a%%used, the burden o e4iden%eis shi ted to hi' to "ro4e with %lear and %on4in%ing e4iden%e the essential re=uisites o sel 5de ense, na'ely 8a: unlaw ul aggression on the "art o the 4i%ti' 8b: reasonablene%essity o the 'eans e'"loyed to re"el or "re4ent it and 8%: la% o su i%ient"ro4o%ation on the "art o the "erson de ending hi'sel . There %an be no %o'"lete or in%o'"lete sel 5de ense or de ense o relati4es unless the a%%used "ro4es unlaw ulaggression on the "art o the 4i%ti'. ) /+ The a%%used 'ust rely on the strength o hise4iden%e and not on the wea ness o the e4iden%e o the "rose%ution or by "leadingsel 5de ense, the a%%used thereby ad'its ha4ing illed the 4i%ti' and he %an no longer be e&onerated o the %ri'e %harged i he ails to "ro4e the %on luen%e o the essentialre=uisites or sel 5de ense and de ense o a relati4e. ) 9+

A""ellant Ronald ailed to dis%harge his burden.First. A ter shooting and stabbing ;iosdado, a""ellant Ronald led ro' the situs

criminis. Flight ro' the situs o the %ri'e is a 4eritable badge o guilt and negates his"lea o sel 5de ense. ) +

#e%ond. A""ellant Ronald threw away his "alti .9D gun and the bolo he used inha% ing ;iosdado as he led ro' the s%ene o the %ri'e instead o surrendering thesa'e to the "oli%e authorities. A""ellant Ronald ad'itted that he had no li%ense or thegun(

>here is that gun now that you useG

A I do not now, @our 3onor, I thin I was able to throw it away.

>hereG

A At ;anawan, @our 3onor.

;anawan, is that a la eG

A No, @our 3onor, it is a ri%e ar'.

>hat ind o gun is thisG

A !alti .9D, @our 3onor. ) 2+

ATT@. BALLEBAR(

= By the way, where is that bolo that you used in ha% ing and stabbing ;iosdadoVolanteG

a I do not now any'ore be%ause I was able to throw it away also when I ran away.

= >here is that "la%e where you throw itG

a It was by the NIA road.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn41http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn42http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn43http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn44http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn45http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn41http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn42http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn43http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn44http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn45


32/95

= @ou 'entioned also a while ago that this gun that you said is a "alti and you throw itaway also, is it notG

a @es, $aa'.

= And that gun had been in your "ossession the whole day that you are dri4ing u" tothe ti'e you shot the 4i%ti', ;iosdado VolanteG

a @es, $aa'.

= ;o you ha4e li%ense to "ossess that irear'G

a None, $aa'. ) 0+

The ailure o a""ellant Ronald to surrender the bolo and his gun to the "oli%eauthorities belies his %lai' o sel 5de ense.

Third. A""ellant Ronald ailed to re"ort the in%ident to the "oli%e authorities e4enwhen they arrested hi'. Curiously, he ailed to in or' the "oli%e o i%ers who arrestedhi' that he a%ted in sel 5de ense when he shot and stabbed the 4i%ti' The resounding

silen%e o the a""ellant is another indi%iu' o the in%redibility o his de ense.) + $oreo4er, the re%ords show that the 'uni%i"al trial %ourt issued a sub"oena on


33/95

/. hen I went ba% to the house, he was still ali4e 8Tsn ". *1, / * 1 :. 5 LV @es, the4i%ti' %ould ha4e died instantly 8Tsn ". 92, / 9 1 : >ith wounds sustained, he %ouldha4e died instantly 8". D, Co'"lainants $e'orandu':.

. It was bright inside our house with a erosene and a bottle la'" 8Tsn "". 9959 ,/ * 1 :. 6nly one erosene la'" 5 bottle o gin with wi% and light 8Tsn ". *-,

* 1 5 #!6* !ornillos

#urrounding house, dar , total dar ness 8Tsn "". */5*9, * 1 :.

D. #%ene !hotogra"hy by


34/95

How witness is impeached by evidence of inconsistent statement. Before a %itne$$can be i#peached by e!idence that he ha$ #ade at other ti#e$ $tate#ent$ incon$i$tent%ith hi$ pre$ent te$ti#ony, the $tate#ent$ #u$t be related to hi#, %ith thecircu#$tance$ of the ti#e$ and place$ and the per$on$ pre$ent, and he #u$t be a$3ed%hether he #ade $uch $tate#ent$, and if $o, allo%ed to e+plain the#. >f the $tate#ent$

be in %riting they #u$t be $ho%n to the %itne$$ before any Eue$tion i$ put to hi#concerning the#.

The Court agrees with the 6 i%e o the #oli%itor ?eneral. Be ore the %redibility o awitness and the truth ulness o his testi'ony %an be i'"ea%hed by e4iden%e %onsistingo his "rior state'ents whi%h are in%onsistent with his "resent testi'ony, the %ross5e&a'iner 'ust lay the "redi%ate or the oundation or i'"ea%h'ent and thereby "re4entan injusti%e to the witness being %ross5e&a'ined. The witness 'ust be gi4en a %han%eto re%olle%t and to e&"lain the a""arent in%onsisten%y between his two state'ents andstate the %ir%u'stan%es under whi%h they were 'ade. )2*+ This Court held in People v.4scosura ' - that the state'ents o a witness "rior to her "resent testi'ony %annot ser4eas basis or i'"ea%hing her %redibility unless her attention was dire%ted to thein%onsisten%ies or dis%re"an%ies and she was gi4en an o""ortunity to e&"lain saidin%onsisten%ies. In a %ase where the %ross5e&a'iner tries to i'"ea%h the %redibility andtruth ulness o a witness 4ia her testi'ony during a "reli'inary e&a'ination, this Courtoutlined the "ro%edure in 5nited #tates vs. Balu0ot, ' 6 thus(

... or in$tance, if the attorney for the accu$ed had infor#ation that a certain %itne$$,$ay edro =on8ale$, had #ade and $igned a $%orn $tate#ent before the fi$cal#aterially different fro# that gi!en in hi$ te$ti#ony before the court, it %a$incu#bent upon the attorney %hen cro$$ e+a#ining $aid %itne$$ to direct hi$ attention

to the di$crepancy and to a$3 hi# if he did not #a3e $uch and $uch $tate#ent beforethe fi$cal or if he did not there #a3e a $tate#ent different fro# that deli!ered in court.>f the %itne$$ ad#it$ the #a3ing of $uch contradictory $tate#ent, the accu$ed ha$ the

benefit of the ad#i$$ion, %hile the %itne$$ ha$ the opportunity to e+plain thedi$crepancy, if he can. 4n the other hand, if the %itne$$ denie$ #a3ing any $uchcontradictory $tate#ent, the accu$ed ha$ the right to pro!e that the %itne$$ did #a3e$uch $tate#ent- and if the fi$cal $hould refu$e upon due notice to produce thedocu#ent, $econdary e!idence of the content$ thereof %ould be ad#i$$ible. Thi$

proce$$ of cro$$ e+a#ining a %itne$$ upon the point of prior contradictory $tate#ent$i$ called in the practice of the 5#erican court$ laying a predicate for the introductionof contradictory $tate#ent$. >t i$ al#o$t uni!er$ally accepted that unle$$ a ground i$thu$ laid upon cro$$ e+a#ination, e!idence of contradictory $tate#ent$ are notad#i$$ible to i#peach a %itne$$- though undoubtedly the #atter i$ to a large e+tent inthe di$cretion of the court.

In this %ase, the a""ellants ne4er %on ronted Lu with her testi'ony during the"reli'inary e&a'ination and her sworn state'ent. #he was not a orded any %han%e to

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn51http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn52http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn53http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn51http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn52http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn53


35/95

e&"lain any dis%re"an%ies between her "resent testi'ony and her testi'ony during the"reli'inary e&a'ination and her sworn state'ent. The a""ellants did not e4en 'arand o er in e4iden%e the said trans%ri"t and sworn state'ent or the s"e%i i% "ur"ose o i'"ea%hing her %redibility and her "resent testi'ony. 7nless so 'ar ed and o ered ine4iden%e and a%%e"ted by the trial %ourt, said trans%ri"t and sworn state'ent %annot be

%onsidered by the %ourt.)2 +

6n the "ur"orted in%onsisten%ies or dis%re"an%ies %atalogued by the a""ellantsrelating to the testi'ony o Lu during the "reli'inary e&a'ination and her swornstate'ent, the 6 i%e o the #oli%itor ?eneral "osits that(

Si+th, bid, p. 20*.But it i$ not incon$i$tent %ith the e+pert opinion of r. (on$olacion that by the natureof the %ound$ $u$tained by the !icti#, the latter could ha!e died thereof

in$tantaneou$ly )TS , ebruary , 1997, p. ;*. >t i$ clear that the $aid phy$ician %a$#erely $tating a po$$ibility and not %hat happened in the in$tant ca$e becau$e in thefir$t place, $he %a$ not pre$ent at the $cene right after the incident.

Se!enth, bid, pp. , ;2 ; * . @hile it #ay appear contradictory to S 41 ornillo$ te$ti#onythat there %a$ only a 3ero$ene la#p at the ti#e, he could not ha!e been e+pected tonotice all the thing$ found in$ide the hou$e, including the bottle la#p, becau$e he

#ight not ha!e been fa#iliar %ith it$ interior$. 4r, he could ha!e focu$ed hi$ attention pri#arily on the body of the fallen !icti# and the ob&ect$ that #ay be u$ed later a$e!idence again$t the perpetrator$ of the cri#e.

ight, it i$ ad#itted that the te$ti#onie$ of


36/95

dilute the "robati4e weight o the testi'ony. It bears stressing that e4en the 'ost truth ulwitness %an 'a e 'ista es but su%h inno%ent la"ses do not ne%essarily a e%t his%redibility. The testi'onies o witnesses 'ust be %onsidered and %alibrated in their entirety and not by their trun%ated "ortions or isolated "assages. )20+ And then again,'inor %ontradi%tions a'ong se4eral witnesses o a "arti%ular in%ident and as"e%t

thereo whi%h do not relate to the gra4a'en o the %ri'e %harged are to be e&"e%ted in4iew o their di eren%es in i'"ressions, 'e'ory, 4antage "oints and other relateda%tors.)2 +

Contrary to a""ellant itness 'ay answer.

>ITNE##(

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn56http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn57http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn56http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn57


37/95

A A "i"e.

ATT@. BALLEBAR(

Now, will you tell us 'ore or less how long was that "i"e that was used by RonaldCastillanoG

A About one 8*: 'eter, $aa'.)2D+

Lu was 'erely i4e 'eters away ro' where ;iosado was atta% ed and stabbed bythe a""ellants. A""ellant ITNE##(


38/95

T ) #+ ) #o ) *y A--)ll$

The trial %ourt %orre%tly %on4i%ted the a""ellants o 'urder, =uali ied by trea%hery,under Arti%le / D o the Re4ised !enal Code. The Court, howe4er, does not agree withthe trial %ourts inding that e4ident "re'editation attended the %o''ission o the %ri'e.

Case law has it that the "rose%ution has the burden to "ro4e beyond reasonabledoubt =uali ying %ir%u'stan%es in the %o''ission o the %ri'e. For e4ident"re'editation to =uali y a %ri'e, the "rose%ution 'ust "ro4e the %on luen%e o theessential re=uites thereo ( 8a: the ti'e when the o ender has deter'ined to %o''it the%ri'e 8b: an a%t 'ani estly indi%ating that the o ender has %lung to his deter'ination8%: an inter4al o ti'e between the deter'ination and the e&e%ution o the %ri'e enoughto allow hi' to re le%t u"on the %onse=uen%es o his a%t. )0*+ There 'ust be "roo beyond%a4il when and how the o ender "lanned to ill the 4i%ti' and that su i%ient ti'e hadela"sed between the ti'e he had de%ided to ill the 4i%ti' and the a%tual illing o the4i%ti', and that in the interi', the o ender "er or'ed o4ert a%ts "ositi4ely and

%on%lusi4ely showing his deter'ination to %o''it the said %ri'e.)0/+

In this %ase, the onlye4iden%e addu%ed by the "rose%ution to "ro4e e4ident "re'editation is the testi'ony o Le4y A4ila that between 2(-- ".'. and 0(-- ".'. on f there i$ node$ignation of the offen$e, reference $hall be #ade to the $ection or $ub$ection of the$tatute puni$hing it.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn61http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn62http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn63http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn64http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn61http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn62http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn63http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/apr2003/139412.htm#_ftn64


39/95

The use by a""ellant Ronald o an unli%ensed irear' to shoot ;iosdado on thethigh is not an aggra4ating %ir%u'stan%e be%ause 8*: there is no allegation in thein or'ation that said a""ellant had no li%ense to "ossess the irear'. That a""ellantla% ed the li%ense to "ossess the irear' is an essential ele'ent o the %ri'e and 'ustbe alleged in the in or'ation. )02+ Although the %ri'e was %o''itted be ore the new rule

too e e%t on ;e%e'ber *, /--/, the rule should, howe4er, be a""lied retroa%ti4ely as itis a4orable to the a""ellants. )00+

The a""ellants are not entitled to the 'itigating %ir%u'stan%e o 4oluntary surrender.The e4iden%e shows that the a""ellants were arrested when the "oli%e o i%ers 'anningthe %he% "oint sto""ed the "assenger jee"ney dri4en by a""ellant Ronald and arrestedthe a""ellants. The a%t that the a""ellants did not resist but went "ea%e ully with the"ea%e o i%ers does not 'ean that they surrendered 4oluntarily. )0 +

There being no 'itigating and aggra4ating %ir%u'stan%es in the %o''ission o the%ri'e, the a""ellants should be 'eted the "enalty o reclusion perpetua %on or'ablywith Arti%le 09 o the Re4ised !enal Code.

T ) # 5 l L $* l ) o8 ) A--)ll$

The trial %ourt awarded the total a'ount o !* , /* as %i4il inde'nity, a%tual and'oral da'ages in a4or o the heirs o the 4i%ti' ;iosdado. The Court has to 'odi y theawards.

A""ellants Ronald and


40/95

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING , the ;e%ision o the Regional Trial Court o Ca'arines #ur, Bran%h 9* in Cri'inal Case No. !5/2 / is AFFIR$E; with$6;IFICATI6N. A""ellants Ronald Castillano alias Nono and


41/95

T3IR; ;IVI#I6N

G.R. No. 9019: No5) *)+ 7, 199(

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, "lainti 5a""ellee,4s.ANTONIO PLASEN#IA y ESA/PARA O alias ;To y , ES#ARTIN y PASI#ARAN, a%%used5a""ellants .

"IT%G, J.:

Antonio !lasen%ia, Roberto ;es%artin and at%h 4alued at !9,---.-- one 8*: Bi%y%le 8standard si e: 4alued at !*,---.--and %ash in the a'ount o !*-,---.--, all in the total a'ount o F67R5TEEN T367#AN; !E#6#8!* ,---.--:, !hili""ine Curren%y, to the da'age and "rejudi%e o said oner 8 sic : in the said totalsu'.

All %ontrary to law, and with the =uali ying %ir%u'stan%e o alevosia , and the generi% aggra4ating%ir%u'stan%e o nown "re'editation.

C6NTRAR@ T6 LA>. 1


42/95

>hen arraigned, all the a%%used entered a "lea o not guilty to the %harge whereu"on, trial %o''en%ed.

The "rose%ution sought to establish, as ollows(

At around ten oK%lo% in the 'orning o /1 No4e'ber *1D , 3er'inio $ansueto, wearing a blue and white stri"ed t5shirt, 'aong "ants, #ei o 2 sto" wat%h and a pandan hat, le t on his bi%y%le or Barangay !atao, Bantayan, Cebu. 3e

had with hi' !*-,---.-- %ash whi%h he would use to "ur%hase hogs ro' a %ertain Ruby.

In !atao, Fran%is%a Es"ina, also nown in the lo%ality as !ansing and whose house was just a%ross the street ro'the res"e%ti4e residen%es o the three a%%used, saw at the roadside 3er'inio $ansueto and Roberto;es%artin alias Ruby engaged in %on4ersation. !ansing a""roa%hed the' and as ed $ansueto i he would beinterested in buying two o her "igs or !*, --.--. $ansueto said yes and "ro'ised that he would be right ba% .

$ansueto and Ruby 'eanti'e "ro%eeded to the latterKs "iggery. hen she as ed RubyKs ather about it,he said that the stains had %o'e ro' %hi% en blood. ?oing around the "iggery, she also saw blood stains on aba'boo "ole, whi%h RubyKs ather on%e again so identi ied as %hi% en blood. At the ba% o the "iggery, Fran%is%anoti%ed a digging whi%h loo ed li e an e'"ty gra4e. The digging was 'easured and "hotos were ta en. The "oli%e

ound a hat at the ba% o a hut beside the "iggery, whi%h was later re%ogni ed to be that whi%h belonged to$ansueto. 6

In the 'orning o 9- No4e'ber *1D , !atrol'an El"idio ;es=uitado o the Bantayan "oli%e went ba% to the "iggery.This ti'e, the "oli%e learned ro' !ansing hersel that


43/95

?uided by


44/95

%ourt and the e i%a%y o its de%ision are not a e%ted by the %essation ro' the ser4i%e o the judge"residing it 20 or by the a%t that its writer 'erely too o4er ro' a %olleague who "resided at the trial. 21

It is asserted that the testi'ony o Fran%is%a Es"ina should not be gi4en worth sin%e, while testi ying, she would atti'es be seen reading so'e notes written on her le t "al'. Thus M

. $ay I see your le t hand, 'ay I see what is written thereG

A. >itness showing to the %ourt her le t "al' and the ollowing words ha4e beenwritten in her "al' in ball "en handwritten words and nu'ber o the "u'"boatNo. 20 and there is another word "etsa and there are words whi%h %annot bede%i"hered and all ound in the "al' o the le t hand.

ATT@. $6NTECLAR(

That is all.

ATT@. ?6N ALE#( RE5CR6##

$rs. witness, you %annot deny o what these "hysi%al e4iden%es or writings onthe "al' o your le t hand. I want you to be honest, the law will not allow you tolie, you are subje%t to "unish'ent and "enalty. $y =uestion is, who wrote this onthe "al' o your le t handG

A I was the one who wrote this.

>hy did you write that downG

A I was the one who wrote this.

>hy, what was your "ur"ose o writing that in your "al'G

A I wrote this in 'y "al' be%ause I wanted to be sure o what ti'e the in%identha""ened, was the sa'e as that I wrote in 'y "al'.

And who urnished you the data in whi%h you wrote in the "al' o your handG

A I was the one who 'ade that.

ATT@. ?6N ALE#(

@ou donKt understand 'y =uestion. @ou wrote that writing but where did youget that dataG

A. This is just o what I now.

#in%e you %lai' to ha4e all this nowledge o your 'ind, why did you ind itne%essary to write that in the "al' o your hand and I noti%e during the trial thatyou used to loo in your "al', why, is that ne%essary in your belie4e to testi yhere to what you new about the in%ident.


45/95

A Be%ause o the a%t that I ha4e an heada%he.

>hen did this heada%he o%%urG

A A ter I le t 'y house be%ause 'y si% %hild.

Now, nowing that you ha4e an heada%he, did you not bring this to theattention o the Fis%alG

A No, I did not tell the Fis%al.

;o you now o your own that doing this is un air and is not allowable whiletesti ying in o"en %ourt, do you now that is illegal a%tG

A No, I did not, now.

And you did all o this %lai'ing that you do not now about the in%ident or the"ur"ose o gi4ing here testi'ony against the a%%usedG

A @es, sir. 22

The use o 'e'ory aids during an e&a'ination o a witness is not altogether "ros%ribed. #e%tion *0, Rule *9/, o theRules o Court states(

#e%. *0. 73en 1itness ma0 re&er to memorandum . M A witness 'ay be allowed to re resh his'e'ory res"e%ting a a%t, b0 an0t3ing 1ritten or recorded b0 3imsel& or under his dire%tion at theti'e when the a%t o%%urred, or i''ediately therea ter, or at an0 ot3er time 13en t3e &act 1as &res3in 3is memor0 and 3e 2ne1 t3at t3e same 1as correctl0 1ritten or recorded but in su%h %ase t3e1riting or record must be produced and ma0 be inspected b0 t3e adverse part0, 13o ma0, i& 3ec3ooses, cross"e8amine t3e 1itness upon it and ma0 read it in evidence . #o, also, a witness 'ay

testi y ro' su%h a writing or re%ord, though he retain no re%olle%tion o the "arti%ular a%ts, i he isable to swear that the writing or re%ord %orre%tly stated the transa%tion when 'ade but su%he4iden%e 'ust be re%ei4ed with %aution. 8E'"hasis su""lied.:

Allowing a witness to re er to her notes rests on the sound dis%retion o the trial %ourt. 23 In this %ase, thee&er%ise o that dis%retion has not been abused the witness hersel has e&"lained that she'erely wanted to be a%%urate on dates and li e details.

A""ellants see inad4erten%y on Fran%is%aKs a""earing to be jittery on the witness stand. Ner4ousness and an&ietyo a witness is a natural rea%tion "arti%ularly in the %ase o those who are %alled to testi y or the irst ti'e. The real%on%ern, in a%t, should be when they show no su%h e'otions.

Fran%is%a did ail in i''ediately re"orting the illing to the "oli%e authorities. ;elay or 4a%illation, howe4er, in 'a inga %ri'inal a%%usation does not ne%essarily adulterate the %redibility o the witness. 24 Fran%is%a, in her %ase, hase&"ressed ears or her li e %onsidering that the assailants, being her neighbors, %ould easily e&a%tretribution on her. 2( Also, the hesitan%y in re"orting the o%%urren%e o a %ri'e in rural areas is notun nown. 26

Fran%is%aKs inability to res"ond to the su''ons or another a""earan%e in %ourt or urther =uestioning wassatis a%torily e&"lained by the "rose%ution. Fran%is%a at the ti'e just had a 'is%arriage and was ound to be too weato tra4el. The re%all o the witness was, a ter all, at the sound dis%retion o the trial %ourt. 27


46/95

The %lai' o a""ellant Roberto ;es%artin that Fran%is%a and her husband, a tuba 5gatherer, owed hi' !9--.--, andthe assertion 'ade by a""ellant Antonio !lasen%ia on the dog5biting story in4ol4ing Fran%is%aKs son truly were too"etty to %onsider. It would be absurd to thin that Fran%is%a, or su%h tri4ial reasons was a%tually i'"elled to alselyi'"li%ate a""ellants or so gra4e an o ense as 'urder.

A""ellants =uestioned Fran%is%aKs ability to re%ogni e the' ro' a distan%e. Fran%is%a new a""ellants well they all

were her neighbors while Antonio !lasen%ia hi'sel was her %ousin. 2: The %ri'e o%%urred at around threeoK%lo% in the a ternoon only about i ty 82-: 'eters away ro' her. >ith an unobstru%ted 4iew, Fran%is%aKs"ositi4e identi i%ation o the %ul"rits should be a oregone 'atter. 29

The alleged in%onsisten%ies in Fran%is%aKs testi'ony and in her sworn state'ent o *D ;e%e'ber *1D , %o4er'atters o little signi i%an%e. $inor in%onsisten%ies in the testi'onies o witnesses do not detra%t ro' their%redibility 30 on the %ontrary, they ser4e to strengthen their %redibility and are ta en as badges o truthrather than as indicia o alsehood 31 e4en as they also erase sus"i%ion o rehearsed testi'ony. 32

All %onsidered, the %ase against the a""ellants has been "ro4en beyond reasonable doubt e4en with the retra%tede&tra5judi%ial ad'ission o


47/95

#6 6R;ERE;.

9eliciano, :omero, Melo and Panganiban, JJ., concur.


48/95

#EC6N; ;IVI#I6N

[G.R. No. 96202. A-+ l 13, 1999]

ROSELLA . #AN?%E, petitione , vs. THE #O%RT OF APPEALS$ SO#OR #ONSTR%#TION #ORPORATION, espondents .

E # I S I O N/EN O A, J .&

This "etition or re4iew on %ertiorari see s a re4ersal o the de%ision )*+ o the Court o

A""eals a ir'ing the judg'ent)/+

o the Regional Trial Court o Cebu City ordering"etitioner 5

. . . to "ay )"ri4ate res"ondent+ the "rin%i"al su' o Two 3undred Ninety NineThousand #e4en 3undred #e4enteen !esos and #e4enty Fi4e Centa4os8!/11, * . 2: "lus interest thereon at */ "er annu' ro' #e"te'ber //,*1D0, the date o the iling o the %o'"laint until ully "aid to "ay )"ri4ateres"ondent+ the urther su' o Ten Thousand !esos 8!*-,---.--: orreasonable attorneys ees to "ay the su' o Fi4e 3undred Fi ty Two !esosand Eighty #i& Centa4os 8!22/.D0: or iling ees and to "ay the %osts o

suit. #in%e )"ri4ate res"ondent+ withdrew its "rayer or an alias writ o"reli'inary atta%h'ent 4is5a54is the )"etitioners+ %ounterbound, the in%ident onthe alias writ o "reli'inary atta%h'ent has be%o'e 'oot and a%ade'i%.

The a%ts are as ollows(

!etitioner Rosella ;. Can=ue is a %ontra%tor doing business under the na'e andstyle R;C Constru%tion. At the ti'e 'aterial to this %ase, she had %ontra%ts with thego4ern'ent or 8a: the restoration o Cebu5Toledo whar road 8b: the as"halting o Luto"an a%%ess road and 8%: the as"halting o Babag road in La"ula"u City. )9+ In%onne%tion with these "roje%ts, "etitioner entered into two %ontra%ts with "ri4ateres"ondent #o%or Constru%tion Cor"oration.The irst %ontra%t 8E&h. A:, ) + dated A"ril /0,*1D2, "ro4ided(

The #ub5Contra%tor 8#6C6R Cor"oration: and the Contra%tor 8R;CConstru%tion: or the %onsideration hereina ter na'ed, hereby agree as

ollows(

*. #C6!E 6F >6RH(

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn4


49/95

a. The #ub5Contra%tor agrees to "er or' and e&e%ute the #u""ly, Lay and Co'"a%tIte' 9*- and Ite' 9-/

b. That Contra%tor shall "ro4ide the labor and 'aterials needed to %o'"lete the"roje%t

%. That the Contra%tor agrees to "ay the #ub5Contra%tor the "ri%e o 6ne Thousand!esos only 8!*,---.--: "er $etri% Ton o Ite' 9*- and Eight Thousand 6nly8!D,---.--: "er $etri% Ton o Ite' 9-/.

d. That the Contra%tor shall "ay the #ub5Contra%tor the 4olu'e o the su""lied Ite'based on the a%tual weight in $etri% Tons deli4ered, laid and %o'"a%ted anda%%e"ted by the $!>3

e. The %onstru%tion will %o''en%e u"on the a%%e"tan%e o the o er.

The se%ond %ontra%t 8E&h. B:,)2+ dated


50/95

. . . %onsidering that the deli4eries o )"ri4ate res"ondent+ were not signed anda% nowledged by the %he% ers o )"etitioner+, the bitu'inous ta% %oat itdeli4ered to )"etitioner+ %onsisted o 0- water, and )"etitioner+ has already"aid )"ri4ate res"ondent+ about !*, --,---.-- but )"ri4ate res"ondent+ hasnot issued any re%ei"t to )"etitioner+ or said "ay'ents and there is noagree'ent that )"ri4ate res"ondent+ will %harge 9 "er 'onth interest .)D+

!etitioner subse=uently a'ended her answer denying she had entered into sub5%ontra%ts with "ri4ate res"ondent. )1+

;uring the trial, "ri4ate res"ondent, as "lainti , "resented its 4i%e5"resident, #o ia6. #an%he , and ;olores Aday, its boo ee"er.

!etitioners e4iden%e %onsisted o her lone testi'ony. )*-+

6n


51/95

First. !etitioner %ontends that the "resentation o the deli4ery re%ei"ts duly a%%e"tedby the then $inistry o !ubli% >or s and 3ighways 8$!>3: is re=uired under the%ontra%ts 8E&hs. A and B: and is a %ondition "re%edent or her "ay'ent o the a'ount%lai'ed by "ri4ate res"ondent. !etitioner argues that the entries in "ri4ate res"ondentsBoo o Colle%tible A%%ounts 8E&h. H: %annot ta e the "la%e o the deli4ery re%ei"ts and

that su%h entries are 'ere hearsay and, thus, inad'issible in e4iden%e.)* +

>e agree with the a""ellate %ourt that the sti"ulation in the two %ontra%ts re=uiringthe sub'ission o deli4ery re%ei"ts does not "re%lude "roo o deli4ery o 'aterials by"ri4ate res"ondent in so'e other way. The =uestion is whether the entries in the Booo Colle%tible A%%ounts 8E&h. H: %onstitute %o'"etent e4iden%e to show su%hdeli4ery. !ri4ate res"ondent %ites Rule *9-, 9 o the Rules o Court and argues that theentries in =uestion %onstitute entries in the %ourse o business su i%ient to "ro4edeli4eries 'ade or the go4ern'ent "roje%ts. This "ro4ision reads(

4ntries in t3e course o& business . Entries 'ade at, or near the ti'e o thetransa%tions to whi%h they re er, by a "erson de%eased, outside o the!hili""ines or unable to testi y, who was in a "osition to now the a%ts thereinstated, 'ay be re%ei4ed as prima &acie e4iden%e, i su%h "erson 'ade theentries in his "ro essional %a"a%ity or in the "er or'an%e o duty and in theordinary or regular %ourse o business or duty. )*2+

The ad'ission in e4iden%e o entries in %or"orate boo s re=uires the satis a%tion o the ollowing %onditions(

*. The "erson who 'ade the entry 'ust be dead, outside the %ountry or unable totesti y

/. The entries were 'ade at or near the ti'e o the transa%tions to whi%h they re er9. The entrant was in a "osition to now the a%ts stated in the entries

. The entries were 'ade in his "ro essional %a"a%ity or in the "er or'an%e o aduty, whether legal, %ontra%tual, 'oral or religious and

2. The entries were 'ade in the ordinary or regular %ourse o business or duty. )*0+

As "etitioner "oints out, the business entries in =uestion 8E&h. H: do not 'eet theirst and third re=uisites. ;olores Aday, who 'ade the entries, was "resented by "ri4ate

res"ondent to testi y on the a%%ount o R;C Constru%tion. It was in the %ourse o her testi'ony that the entries were "resented and 'ar ed in e4iden%e. There was,

there ore, neither justi i%ation nor ne%essity or the "resentation o the entries as the"erson who 'ade the' was a4ailable to testi y in %ourt.

Ne%essity is gi4en as a ground or ad'itting entries, in that they are the besta4ailable e4iden%e. #aid a learned judge( >hat a 'an has a%tually done and%o''itted to writing when under obligation to do the a%t, it being in the %ourseo the business he has underta en, and he being dead, there see's to be no

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn16


52/95

danger in sub'itting to the %onsideration o the %ourt. The "erson who 'ay be%alled to %ourt to testi y on these entries being dead, there arises thene%essity o their ad'ission without the one who 'ade the' being %alled to%ourt be sworn and subje%ted to %ross5e&a'ination. And this is "er'issible inorder to "re4ent a ailure o justi%e. )* +

$oreo4er, Aday ad'itted that she had no "ersonal nowledge o the a%ts%onstituting the entry. #he said she 'ade the entries based on the bills gi4en to her. Butshe has no nowledge o the truth or alsity o the a%ts stated in the bills. The deli4erieso the 'aterials stated in the bills were su"er4ised by an engineer or 8su%h: un%tions.)*D+ The "erson, there ore, who has "ersonal nowledge o the a%ts stated in theentries, i.e., that su%h deli4eries were 'ade in the a'ounts and on the dates stated,was the %o'"anys "roje%t engineer. The entries 'ade by Aday show only that thebillings had been sub'itted to her by the engineer and that she aith ully re%orded thea'ounts stated therein in the boo s o a%%ount. >hether or not the bills gi4en to Aday%orre%tly re le%ted the deli4eries 'ade in the a'ounts and on the dates indi%ated was a

a%t that %ould be established by the "roje%t engineer alone who, howe4er, was not"resented during trial. The rule is stated by or'er Chie +hen the witness had no "ersonal nowledge o the a%ts entered by hi',and the "erson who ga4e hi' the in or'ation is indi4idually nown and 'aytesti y as to the a%ts stated in the entry whi%h is not "art o a syste' o entrieswhere s%ores o e'"loyees ha4e inter4ened, su%h entry is not ad'issiblewithout the testi'ony o the in or'er .)*1+

S) o . It is nonetheless argued by "ri4ate res"ondent that although the entries

%annot be %onsidered an e&%e"tion to the hearsay rule, they 'ay be ad'itted under Rule *9/, *- )/-+o the Rules o Court whi%h "ro4ides(

#EC. *-. 73en 1itness ma0 re&er to memorandum. A witness 'ay be allowedto re resh his 'e'ory res"e%ting a a%t, by anything written by hi'sel orunder his dire%tion at the ti'e when the a%t o%%urred, or i''ediatelytherea ter, or at any other ti'e when the a%t was resh in his 'e'ory and he

new that the sa'e was %orre%tly stated in the writing but in su%h %ase thewriting 'ust be "rodu%ed and 'ay be ins"e%ted by the ad4erse "arty, who'ay, i he %hooses, %ross5e&a'ine the witness u"on it, and 'ay read it in

e4iden%e. #o, also, a witness 'ay testi y ro' su%h a writing, though he retainno re%olle%tion o the "arti%ular a%ts, i he is able to swear that the writing%orre%tly stated the transa%tion when 'ade but su%h e4iden%e 'ust bere%ei4ed with %aution.

6n the other hand, "etitioner %ontends that e4iden%e whi%h is inad'issible or the"ur"ose or whi%h it was o ered %annot be ad'itted or another "ur"ose. #he %ites the

ollowing ro' Chie


53/95

The "ur"ose or whi%h the e4iden%e is o ered 'ust be s"e%i ied. >here theo er is general, and the e4iden%e is ad'issible or one "ur"ose andinad'issible or another, the e4iden%e should be reje%ted. Li ewise, where theo er is 'ade or two or 'ore "ur"oses and the e4iden%e is in%o'"etent orone o the', the e4iden%e should be e&%luded. The reason or the rule is thatit is the duty o a "arty to sele%t the %o'"etent ro' the in%o'"etent ino ering testi'ony, and he %annot i'"ose this duty u"on the trial %ourt. >herethe e4iden%e is inad'issible or the "ur"ose stated in the o er, it 'ust bereje%ted, though the sa'e 'ay be ad'issible or another "ur"ose. The rule isstated thus( I a "arty & & & o"ens the "arti%ular 4iew with whi%h he o ers any"art o his e4iden%e, or states the obje%t to be attained by it, he "re%ludeshi'sel ro' insisting on its o"eration in any other dire%tion, or or any otherobje%t and the reason is, that the o""osite "arty is "re4ented ro' obje%tingto its %o'"eten%y in any 4iew di erent ro' the one "ro"osed. )/*+

It should be noted, howe4er, that E&h. H is not really being "resented or another "ur"ose. !ri4ate res"ondents %ounsel o ered it or the "ur"ose o showing the a'ounto "etitioners indebtedness. 3e said(

E&hibit H, your 3onor 5 aith ul re"rodu%tion o "age 8* : o the boo onColle%tible A%%ounts o the "lainti , re le%ting the "rin%i"alindebtedness o de endant in the a'ount o Two hundred ninety5ninethousand se4en hundred se4enteen "esos and se4enty5 i4e %enta4os8!/11, * . 2: and re le%ting as well the a%%u'ulated interest o three"er%ent 89 : 'onthly %o'"ounded su%h that as o ;e%e'ber **,*1D , the a'ount %olle%tible ro' the de endant by the "lainti is #i&hundred si&teen thousand our hundred thirty5 i4e "esos and se4enty5two %enta4os 8!0*0, 92. /: )//+

This is also the "ur"ose or whi%h its ad'ission is sought as a 'e'orandu' tore resh the 'e'ory o ;olores Aday as a witness. In other words, it is the nature o thee4iden%e that is %hanged, not the "ur"ose or whi%h it is o ered.

Be that as it 'ay, %onsidered as a 'e'orandu', E&h. H does not itsel %onstitutee4iden%e. As e&"lained in Borromeo v. Court o& Appeals ()/9+

7nder the abo4e "ro4ision 8Rule *9/, *-:, the 'e'orandu' used to re reshthe 'e'ory o the witness does not %onstitute e4iden%e, and 'ay not bead'itted as su%h, or the si'"le reason that the witness has just the sa'e totesti y on the basis o re reshed 'e'ory. In other words, where the witnesshas testi ied inde"endently o or a ter his testi'ony has been re reshed by a'e'orandu' o the e4ents in dis"ute, su%h 'e'orandu' is not ad'issibleas %orroborati4e e4iden%e. It is sel 5e4ident that a witness 'ay not be

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn23


54/95

%orroborated by any written state'ent "re"ared wholly by hi'. 3e %annot be'ore %redible just be%ause he su""orts his o"en5%ourt de%laration with writtenstate'ents o the sa'e a%ts e4en i he did "re"are the' during the o%%asionin dis"ute, unless the "ro"er "redi%ate o his ailing 'e'ory is "riorly laiddown. >hat is 'ore, e4en where this re=uire'ent has been satis ied, thee&"ress injun%tion o the rule itsel is that su%h e4iden%e 'ust be re%ei4ed with%aution, i only be%ause it is not 4ery di i%ult to %on%ei4e and abri%atee4iden%e o this nature. This is doubly true when the witness stands to gain'aterially or otherwise ro' the ad'ission o su%h e4iden%e . . . . )/ +

As the entries in =uestion 8E&h. H: were not 'ade based on "ersonal nowledge,they %ould only %orroborate ;olores Adays testi'ony that she 'ade the entries as shere%ei4ed the bills.

T + . ;oes this, there ore, 'ean there is no %o'"etent e4iden%e o "ri4ateres"ondents %lai' as "etitioner arguesG )/2+ The answer is in the negati4e. Aside ro'E&h. H, "ri4ate res"ondent "resented the ollowing do%u'ents(

*: E&hibit A 5 Contra%t Agree'ent dated /0 A"ril *1D2 whi%h %ontra%t %o4ersboth the Toledo whar "roje%t and the Babag Road "roje%t in La"ula"u City.

/: E&hibit B 5 Contra%t Agree'ent dated /9


55/95

*-: E&hibit L 5 Bill No. -2 under the a%%ount o R;C Constru%tion in thea'ount o !*29,9D/. 2 dated August / , *1D2.

**: E&hibit $ 5 Bill No. -01 8R;Cs a%%ount:, in the a'ount o !*, -*, 12.--dated No4e'ber /-, *1D2.

*/: E&hibit N 5 Bill No. - * 8R;Cs a%%ount: in the a'ount o ! ,/2-.--dated No4e'ber //, *1D2.

*9: E&hibit 6 5 Bill No. - 1 8R;Cs a%%ount: in the a'ount o ! ,/1-.-- dated;e%e'ber 0, *1D2.

As the trial %ourt ound(

The entries re%orded under E&hibit H were su""orted by E&hibits L, $, N, 6

whi%h are all #o%or Billings under the a%%ount o R;C Constru%tion. Thesebillings were "resented and duly re%ei4ed by the authori ed re"resentati4es o de endant. The %ir%u'stan%es obtaining in the %ase at bar %learly show that

or a long "eriod o ti'e a ter re%ei"t thereo , R;C ne4er 'ani ested itsdissatis a%tion or obje%tion to the a orestated billings sub'itted by"lainti .Neither did de endant i''ediately "rotest to "lainti s allegedin%o'"lete or irregular "er or'an%e. In 4iew o these a%ts, we belie4e Art.*/92 o the New Ci4il Code is a""li%able.

Art. */92. >hen the obligee a%%e"ts the "er or'an%e, nowing its

in%o'"leteness and irregularity and without e&"ressing any "rotest orobje%tion, the obligation is dee'ed %o'"lied with.

FINALL@, a ter a %ons%ientious s%rutiny o the re%ords, we ind E&hibit ;5* 8".D2 re%ord: to be a 'aterial "roo o "lainti s %o'"lete ul ill'ent o itsobligation.

There is no =uestion that "lainti su""lied R;C Constru%tion with Ite' 9-/8Bituni'ous !ri'e Coat:, Ite' 9-9 8Bitu'inous Ta% Coat: and Ite' 9*-8Bituni'ous Con%rete #ur a%e Course: in all the three "roje%ts o the

latter. The Luto"an A%%ess Road "roje%t, the Toledo whar "roje%t and theBabag5La"ula"u Road "roje%t.

6n the other hand, no "roo was e4er o ered by de endant to show the"resen%e o other %ontra%tors in those "roje%ts. >e %an there ore %on%ludethat it was #o%or Constru%tion Cor". AL6NE who su""lied R;C with


56/95

Bitu'inous !ri'e Coat, Bitu'inous Ta% Coat and Bitu'inous Con%rete#ur a%e Course or all the a orena'ed three "roje%ts. )/0+

Indeed, while "etitioner had "re4iously "aid "ri4ate res"ondentabout !*, --,---.-- or deli4eries 'ade in the "ast, she did not show that she 'ade

su%h "ay'ents only a ter the deli4ery re%ei"ts had been "resented by "ri4ateres"ondent. 6n the other hand, it a""ears that "etitioner was able to %olle%t the ulla'ount o "roje%t %osts ro' the go4ern'ent, so that "etitioner would be unjustlyenri%hed at the e&"ense o "ri4ate res"ondent i she is not 'ade to "ay what is her justobligation under the %ontra%ts.

'HEREFORE , the de%ision o the Court o A""eals is AFFIR$E;.

SO OR ERE .

Bellosillo, (C3airman), Puno, uisumbing, and Buena, JJ., %on%ur .

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/apr99/96202.htm#_edn26


57/95

FIR#T ;IVI#I6N

G.R. No. 204169 S)- ) *)+ 11, 2013

@AS%O I'ASA'A, !ETITI6NER,4s.

FELISA #%STO IO GANGAN 1 =A. .A FELISA GANGAN ARA/!%LO, AN FELISA GANGAN I'ASA'A> ANTHE LO#AL #I"IL REGISTRAR OF PASA@ #IT@, RE#!6N;ENT#.

; E C I # I 6 N

"ILLARA/A, JR., J.:

Be ore us is a "etition or re4iew on %ertiorari under Rule 2 o the *11 Rules o Ci4il !ro%edure, as a'ended,assailing the #e"te'ber , /-*/ ;e%ision / and 6%tober *0, /-*/ 6rder 9 o the Regional Trial Court 8RTC:, Bran%h

9, o $anila in Ci4il Case No. **5*/0/-9. The RTC denied the "etition or de%laration o nullity o the 'arriage o"etitioner @asuo Iwasawa with "ri4ate res"ondent Felisa Custodio ?angan due to insu i%ient e4iden%e.

The ante%edents ollow(

!etitioner, a


58/95

8 :

Certi i%ation** ro' the N#6 to the e e%t that there are two entries o 'arriage re%orded by the o i%e"ertaining to "ri4ate res"ondent 'ar ed as E&hibit ; to "ro4e that "ri4ate res"ondent in a%t %ontra%tedtwo 'arriages, the irst one was to a Ray'ond $aglon o Ara'bulo on


59/95

There is no =uestion that the do%u'entary e4iden%e sub'itted by "etitioner are all "ubli% do%u'ents. *;1p3i* As "ro4ided inthe Ci4il Code(

ART. *-. The boo s 'a ing u" the %i4il register and all do%u'ents relating thereto shall be %onsidered "ubli%do%u'ents and shall be "ri'a a%ie e4iden%e o the a%ts therein %ontained.

As "ubli% do%u'ents, they are ad'issible in e4iden%e e4en without urther "roo o their due e&e%ution andgenuineness .*2 Thus, the RTC erred when it disregarded said do%u'ents on the sole ground that the "etitioner didnot "resent the re%ords %ustodian o the N#6 who issued the' to testi y on their authenti%ity and due e&e%ution sin%e"roo o authenti%ity and due e&e%ution was not any'ore ne%essary. $oreo4er, not only are said do%u'entsad'issible, they deser4e to be gi4en e4identiary weight be%ause they %onstitute "ri'a a%ie e4iden%e o the a%tsstated therein. And in the instant %ase, the a%ts stated therein re'ain unrebutted sin%e

Documents

e. Presentation of Evidence