SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

G. R. No. L-35853 June 24, 1983

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LIBRADO CARIAS, et al., accused LIBRADO CARIAS and FELICISIMO MARTINEZ, accused-appellants.

ABAD SANTOS, J.:

This is an automatic review of a decision of the defunct Court of First Instance of Leyte in C Case No. 558 which imposed the death penalty on FELICISIMO MARTINEZ and LIBRADO CARIAS. The same decision adjudged the two to pay solidarity Quiteria Calda the sum of P5,000.00 and another sum of Pl,000.00 to Quiteria and her husband Rufino Gregorio for the value of the things stolen from them and the costs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Originally charged were five named persons and ten John Does of the crane of robbery in band with rape and less serious physical injuries. However, the prosecution moved to dismiss provisionally the case against three of the named accused for lack of sufficient evidence so that only Felicisimo Martinez and Librado Carias were tried and sentenced as above stated.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The information in this case reads as follows:

That on or about the 12th day of September, 1971, in the municipality of Tolosa, Province of Leyte, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused conspiring and confederating together with ten (10) other JOHN DOES whose Identities and whereabouts are still unknown, and mutually helping with one another, armed with boloes and firearms, with the deliberate intent and with intent of gain and by means of violence and intimidation upon RUFINO GREGORIO and QUITERIA CALDA GREGORIO, did, then and there unlawfully and feloniously take, rob and carry away cash money in Philippine Currency, in the sum of P 2.00 and machine tools, hand vise, hand drills, complete carpentry tools, plows, clothing cooking utensils and chickens in the amount of P1,089.00 belonging to said Rufino Gregorio and Quiteria Calda Gregorio without their consent and against their will and to their damage and prejudice in the total amount of P1,091.00; that during and on the occasion of the said robbery the above-named accused, conspiring and confederating together with the aforementioned John Does, and mutually helping one another, did, then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force and intimidation have carnal knowledge with said Quiteria Calda Gregorio against her win and consent; and likewise during and on the occasion thereof, the same above-named accused, acting in the same conspiracy with their oft-mentioned co-accused, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack and inflicted upon said Rufino Gregorio the following injuries, to wit:

Abrasion, contused with lacerated edges, lower lip.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Contusion, of the right infronorbital region.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Abrasions, linear 2 in number at the left hypochondriac region.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Abrasions, multi-linear, multiple over the right and left scapular region.

which required medical attendance from ten (10) to fifteen (15) days to heal and incapacitated him from performing his customary labor for the same period of time."

The People's version of the facts is as follows:

In their house in the mountain in Bo. San Roque, Tolosa, Leyte, while the spouses Rufino Gregorio and Quiteria Calda were resting, after having eaten their supper at 8:30 p.m. on September 12, 1971 (p. 6, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972), they heard a voice at the foot of their stairs calling, 'Manang Teria' (p. 7, tsn, Ibid).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

As the husband Rufino Gregorio was about to open the door, five men, all armed with firearms, forced their way in and entered the house (p. 7, tsn, Ibid; pp. 26-28,. tsn, Dec. 16, 1971). Forthwith, someone hit Rufino Gregorio on the right cheek with the butt of a gun, and the others hit him with a steel bar on the chest, and on the back, which sent him failing unconscious to the floor (p. 7, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972.) Then they tied his hands at his back (p. 12, tsn, Ibid).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Thereafter, the malefactors also tied the hands of Quiteria Calda (p. 33, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971), and brought her to a make-shift bed inside the house and started abusing her, one after the other (pp. 30-31, tsn, Ibid). When the husband regained consciousness a few minutes later, he was lying just one meter away from his wife, and he saw the five men sexually abusing her (pp. 7-8, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972; p. 32, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971). The complaining couple recognized two of the malefactors as Librado Canales Carias and Felicisimo Martinez, appellants herein (p. 8, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972; p. 37, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The five persons maltreated the husband several times. They kicked him (p. 10, tsn., Jan. 14, 1972), and hit him with a steel bar on his abdomen (p. 9, tsn., Ibid). He fell unconscious more than once, and each time he came to, he found his wife still being abused by them (p. 8, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972). He saw the appellants actually having intercourse with his wife (Ibid).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

After the five men were through satiating their desire with Quiteria Calda, they brought the husband Rufino Gregorio downstairs and made him dig a hole in the ground (p. 12, tsn, Jan. 14, 1972). At this juncture, their companions who were waiting downstairs, around ten of them (pp. 30-31, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971), went up the house (pp. 18-19, tsn, Ibid) and continued abusing Quiteria Calda. No less than 15 persons had sexual intercourse with her that night (pp. 30-31, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971), and she, too, lost consciousness after she had been abused (p. 35, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Meanwhile, downstairs, when her husband Rufino Gregorio had already dug a hole about four feet deep and one foot wide (pp. 17-18, tsn, Jan. 14, 1972), the men poked a dagger at the back of his neck and forced him to get inside the hole (Exh. 1, p. 6, rec. of exhs.). It was only when he begged for their mercy that they drew the dagger away and allowed him to go out of the hole (Ibid). They then hog-tied him and carried him upstairs on a bamboo pole (p. 17, tsn, Jan. 14, 1972), and there, they again gave him a terrible blow (Exhibit 1, p. 6, rec. of exhs.).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

When the malefactors finally got tired of abusing and maltreating the complaining couple (Ibid), they ransacked their house and took away with them all their clothes, their kettles, plates, carpentry and mechanical tools, some 40 chickens, and also their dog, all valued at around Pl,000 (p. 9, tsn, Jan. 12, 1972; pp. 38-39, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971, and Exhibit 1, p. 6, rec. of exhs.).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The following morning after the incident, the poor, unfortunate couple went to town and had themselves examined by Dr. Zenaida A. Tansingco, Municipal Health Officer of Tolosa, Leyte (p. 36, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971; and pp. 3-22, tsn, Dec. 16, 1971).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The medical certificate of Rufino Gregorio, Exhibit B, states the following findings

Abrasion, contused with lacerated edges lower lip.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Contusion, of the right infra-orbital region.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Abrasions, linear 2 in number at the left hypochondriac region.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Abrasions, multi-linear, multiple over the right and left scapular region (p. 3, rec. of exhs.) chanrobles virtual law library

which, under normal conditions, would require medical attendance for a period of 10- 1 5, days (p. 3, rec. of exhs.).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The medical certificate of Quiteria Calda, Exhibit C, reveals the following.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

External Findings.

Fairly developed, fairly nourished adult, female, Filipina.

Breast fully developed, hemispherical in shape, soft in consistency. Areola brownish in color with nipples prominent and protruding.

Abrasions, multi-linear scratches 2 in number at the left intra-clavicular region.

Contusion of the left zygomatic region chanrobles virtual law library

Internal Findings:

Pubic hair fairly abundant and fairly distributed with some matted together.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Vaginal Canal with thick mucoid discharged with fish like smell.

Abrasions, linear single of the left labia minora (p. 4, rec. of exhs.).

Also attached to the records is Exhibit A, the extrajudicial confession of appellant Felicisimo Martinez, the pertinent portions of which are quoted as follows:

12. Q - In that particular incident you made mention do you know who were the perpetrators, or the persons responsible in this robbery case in the mountain of Bo. San Roque, Tolosa, Leyte? chanrobles virtual law library

A - I know four persons and the five, I do not know them.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

13. Q - Do you know the four persons you have mentioned? chanrobles virtual law library

A - Yes sir, Brenny Canales Carias of Sitio Sawa, Bo. Opong, Tolosa, Leyte, Lucio Candles of Sitio Sawa, Bo. Opong, Tolosa, Leyte, Fernando Escarlan Advincula alias Andoy of Sitio Sawa, Bo. Opong, Tolosa, Leyte, and Rodolfo Almaden of Bo. San Roque, Tolosa, Leyte.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

14. Q - Do you mean to say that the four you mentioned were the only persons who robbed including you? chanrobles virtual law library

A - No sir, there were other five persons aside from us, the four I just mentioned and myself.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

15. Q - Who were the names of the other persons? chanrobles virtual law library

A - I do not know their names because during that incident that was the first time saw them.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

16. Q - Will you please narrate to me the facts surrounding the incident? chanrobles virtual law library

A - Last September 12, 1971, at about 6:30 in the evening at Bo. San Roque, Tolosa, Leyte, after supper I went out to take a walk. I went to the waiting shade and there I met Brenny Canales and he requested me to go with him to Bo. Sawa, Opong, Tolosa, Leyte. I accompanied him and we passed by the National Highway. When we arrived at Sitio Sawa near the old house of Mateo Calda, Brenny brought me to the dark portion of the coconut plantation, where his companions with guns and bolos were waiting for him Then he requested me to go with their but I was hesitant, then they threatened me with a long gun and a revolver. Because of fear I accompanied them from Sitio Sawa near the house of Mateo Calda we crossed the road and followed a small path till we reached the house of Quiteria Calda in the mountain. While we were in the yard Brenny Carias was the first to call the husband of Quiteria saying, "BAYAW ABREHE CANI" then the husband of Quiteria opened and immediately Brenny struck the husband of Quiteria by the butt of the long gun he was bringing. The husband of Quiteria fall to the floor of the house and the other companions looked for a rope and tied the husband of Quiteria. After that the other fellow hold Quiteria and layed her in a bamboo bed and they commenced their sexual intercourse with the helpless woman by turn, while the husband was tied with a rope looking at his wife being abused by our companions. After their intercourse with Quiteria they brought downstairs the husband of Quiteria and was forced to dig a hole on the ground and was told to surrender his gun. The fact that no gun was given to them, they brought and carried away chickens, utensils and carpentry tools with them when they left. (pp. 1-2, rec. of exhs.) (Brief, pp. 5-12.)

The defense of both appellants is alibi.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Librado Carias claimed that on September 12, 1971, at about 2:00 p.m, he left Barrio Opong in Tolosa, Leyte, for Balangiga, Samar. He arrived in Balangiga at 6:00 p.m. of the same day and there fished until 5:00 p.m. of the next day.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Felicisimo Martinez said that in the evening of September 12, 1971, he was at home in Barrio San Roque, Tolosa, Leyte, where he was busy attending to the last day of prayers for his nephew Romeo Brazil who died on September 3, 1971. He claimed he signed Exhibit A by candle light as there was a blackout and he did not read its contents.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The case presents the all-too-familiar situation where the prosecution claims that the accused were in a certain place and there committed the crime while the latter claim that they could not have committed the crime because they were elsewhere. It is no surprise, therefore, that the appellants assert that the trial judge committed the following errors:

I. THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN GIVING FULL CREDIT TO THE TESTIMONY OF QUITERIA GREGORIO AND HER HUSBAND, RUFINO, chanrobles virtual law library

II. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN NOT GIVING FULL CREDIT TO THE TESTIMONY OF LIBRADO CARIAS.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

III. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN NOT GIVING FULL CREDIT TO THE TESTIMONY OF FELICISIMO MARTINEZ.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

IV. ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT BOTH ACCUSED PARTICIPATED IN THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME, THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN METING OUT THE SUPREME PENALTY OF DEATH TO THEM. (Brief, p. 1.)

The appellants claim that they could not have been positively Identified by the complaining spouses because: "Firstly, Rufino Gregorio admitted that he is a native of Nueva Ecija and has only stayed in Bo. Opong, Tolosa, Leyte, the place of the commission of the crime for one (1) year during which period of time, he seldomly goes out of the barrio on account of his work as a farmer aside from the fact that their house is isolated from the other houses. Such being the case, he has no time to make friends with the people around (tsn p. 8, hearing of January 14, 197 2); Secondly, it was also admitted as a fact all throughout the proceedings that the incident happened in the mountain and at night which was very dark. Thirdly, Rufino Gregorio testified that he lost consciousness several times as a result of the maltreatment he suffered in the hands of the malefactors (t.s.n., hearing of January 12 & 14, 1972; and pp. 22-23, hearing of February 2, 1972). Fourthly, their information as to the alleged culprits was only supplied to them by Pat. Advincula. " (Brief, p. 9.) chanrobles virtual law library

This claim is rendered baseless by the following.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

1. Librado Carias was known to both Rufino Gregorio and his wife. This is shown by his own testimony, thus:

Q. [ATTY. TEODORO ALIANZA, defense counsel] chanrobles virtual law library

Do you have any knowledge why this Quiteria Calda and Gregorio Rufino testify against you for the crime of robbery with rape? chanrobles virtual law library

A We have grudges with them.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q What is the grudge you refer to? chanrobles virtual law library

A On August 28, 1971, in the fiesta at Bo. San Roque, I had a bet with Quiteria Calda and Rufino Gregorio interrupted the game as he did not want Quiteria to loss.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What did you do? chanrobles virtual law library

A I boxed him.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q Where did you hit him, on what part of the body?chanrobles virtual law library

A On the left shoulder. (TSN, July 26, 1972, p. 44.)

2. Felicisimo Martinez was likewise known according to his testimony:

Q. [ATTY. ALIANZA] chanrobles virtual law library

According to QUITERIA Calda you were positively Identified by her as one of the persons who abused her and had carnal knowledge with her against her consent. What do you say to that? chanrobles virtual law library

A Because we had a misunderstanding, chanrobles virtual law library

Q But first of all is that true or not that you abused her? chanrobles virtual law library

A That is not true.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What is that misunderstanding you stated? chanrobles virtual law library

A Because they encroached on taking coconuts from our place which is beyond their land.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why? Has Quiteria Calda any property that adjoins your property? chanrobles virtual law library

A She has no property.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q But whose property have they been occupying chanrobles virtual law library

A Colas Calda.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What relation, if you know, has Colas Calda to Quiteria Calda? chanrobles virtual law library

A Brother and sister.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What about it? What do you have to do if they took coconuts on the land encroaching on the land of Nicolas Calda? Why did you have a difference or misunderstanding with her?chanrobles virtual law library

A That was . . . They also go to our land to pick up coconuts.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Is your land adjoining that of Nicolas Calda the land where you are working chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q You said that they are going beyond the bounds of the land of Nicolas Calda. When you say 'they' whom are you referring to by the word 'they'? chanrobles virtual law library

A Quiteria Calda and Rufino Gregorio.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q How did you come to know that this Quiteria Calda and Rufino Gregorio went beyond the bounds of Nicolas Calda's property and gathered coconuts in that land? chanrobles virtual law library

A I often catch them picking coconuts in our land.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q And what happened when you catch them picking coconuts from your land? chanrobles virtual law library

A I told them not co pick up coconuts because they are no longer theirs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q And what else happened regarding that? chanrobles virtual law library

A Rufino Gregorio challenged me to a fight in the mountain.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Then what else happened? chanrobles virtual law library

A After I admonished them not to pick up coconuts, I went home as Rufino Gregorio challenged me to a fight. (TSN, January 12, 1972, pp. 14-15.)

3. On September 13, 1971, the day following the commission of the crime, Rufino Gregorio had already Identified to Patrolman Napoleon L. Advincula of the Tolosa Police Headquarters the names of the perpetrators as "Librado Candles Carias, Simoy Martinez and their companions." (Exhibit 1.) chanrobles virtual law library

4. It is true the incident happened at night but it cannot be said that it was very dark for as Quiteria testified.

Q [THE COURT]

But you did not notice any of these two [Librado Carias and Felicisimo Martinez]? You just believed they were among those who raped you? You are sure that these two raped you?

A I am sure.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why do you say so? chanrobles virtual law library

A I saw them with my two eyes.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q How did you see them? chanrobles virtual law library

A I saw them because there was a lamp in the house.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q You saw them as being among the people there but you did not see them as being the persons who actually had sexual intercourse with you? chanrobles virtual law library

A Why will I not see them when we had a light inside the house? chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why do you say that they are the persons who raped you? What did they do to you? chanrobles virtual law library

A They had intercourse with me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q When those people had carnal knowledge with you did you see their faces? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes,sir. (TSN,Januaryl2,1972,pp.4-5.)

5. Rufino did testify that he lost consciousness several times as a result of the physical injuries inflicted upon him but this circumstance precisely shows that he had periods of consciousness during which he was able to identify not only his assailants but also those who raped his wife.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The second and third assignments of error which advance the alibis of the appellants are for naught in view of their positive identification by the complaints. And anent the claim of Martinez that he signed Exhibit A which is his confession without knowing what it contained, Judge Lourdes M. Garcia testified as follows:

Fiscal Matol:

Q Judge Garcia, do you know accused Felicisimo Martinez? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, I know him chanrobles virtual law library

Q Kindly point out to him.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

A That fellow. (Witness pointing to a person who answers the name of Felicisimo Martinez) chanrobles virtual law library

Q In the afternoon of September 15, 1971, where were you? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was in my post in Tolosa, Leyte.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Do you know at that time in the afternoon where Felicisimo Martinez was? chanrobles virtual law library

A He was a detained prisoner at the Tolosa municipal jail. He was brought to my court or sala.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q For what purpose was he brought before your presence.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

A He was brought by the officer in charge Palana of the Tolosa police department for the purpose of swearing to his affidavit and for his signature.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q You mean to say that it was a confession of Felicisimo Martinez? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q If a copy of the same will be shown to you, will you be able to recognize the same? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, I will.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Showing to you a confession of Felicisimo Martinez on pages 6 and 7 of the record, and which we request that this be marked as Exhibit "A" for the prosecution, please take a look and tell us what relation it has to the one which you referred to a while ago.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

A This is the same statement.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

COURT: Mark the affidavit as Exhibit "A".chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q On the right side of page of this affidavit is a signature, whose signature is this?chanrobles virtual law library

A That is the signature of Felicisimo Martinez.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why do you say that it is his signature? chanrobles virtual law library

A Because he signed before me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q On page 2 thereof on the bottom is a signature of Felicisimo Martinez over the typewritten name Felicisimo Martinez, whose signature is that? chanrobles virtual law library

A That is his signature.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why do you say that it is his signature? chanrobles virtual law library

A Because he signed before me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Below the jurat is a signature Lourdes M. Garcia, whose signature is that? chanrobles virtual law library

A That is my signature.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Please tell the Court who were the persons present at the time when Felicisimo Martinez swore to his affidavit before you? chanrobles virtual law library

A At first he was brought into the office in the afternoon my clerk was there.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Was there any other policemen? chanrobles virtual law library

A Patrolman Palana who brought him there.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Who handed to you this Exhibit "A"? chanrobles virtual law library

A Pat. Palaña he was the one who handed this to me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q After Pat. Palaña handed this Exhibit "A" to you, where did he go? chanrobles virtual law library

A He went back to his office.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Where was Felicisimo Martinez? chanrobles virtual law library

A Still in my office.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What did you do to him? chanrobles virtual law library

A I asked him if this is his statement and he admitted.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q In what language did you ask him? chanrobles virtual law library

A In the dialect.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q Please tell the Court whether Felicisimo Martinez understands the waray-waray dialect.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, he understands the waray-waray dialect because I asked him, Felicisimo Martinez whether he understand waray-waray and he said 'yes'. I asked him if he understands English, he said that he does not fully understand English and I said that I will translate it into waray-waray.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q What questions did you translate into waray-waray dialect? chanrobles virtual law library

A These questions in the sworn statement.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q After translating the questions and answers in this Exhibit "A", what did you do? chanrobles virtual law library

A I told him to sign the sworn statement. He swore before me and he signed it. After he signed it, I signed my name.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Fiscal Matol: chanrobles virtual law library

That will be all. (TSN, October 18, 1971, pp. 2-4.)

The repudiation of the confession is a crude attempt by Martinez to exculpate himself. The confession is full of details which he alone could have supplied and it even contains exculpatory statements, e.g. that he went with Brenny Canales and his group out of fear and that it was "they" who raped Quiteria.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The court a quo imposed the death penalty on the appellants because it relied on People vs. Obtinalia G.R. No. L-30190, April 30, 1971, 38 SCRA 651, and accordingly applied Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code with the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and ignominy. But the appellants assert that Art. 294 (2), not Art. 335 of the R.P.C. should have been applied.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

There used to be a debate in this Court whether robbery with rape should be classified as a crime against property penalized by Art, 294 (2) of the R.P.C. or as a crime against chastity penalized by Art. 335 of the same Code. The debate was not pointless because before P.D. No. 767 amended Art. 294 (2) of the R.P.C. on August 15, 1975, said article was more favorable to the accused by providing for a lower penalty. The debate was resolved in People vs. Cabural G.R. No. L-34105, February 4, 1983, where ten members of the Court held, in the words of Chief Justice Fernando, "it is Article 294 (2) not Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code that calls for application in the crime of robbery with rape." chanrobles virtual law library

When the crime in this case was committed, the imposable penalty under Art. 294 (2), R.P.C., was reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua. Considering the two aggravating circumstances, the appropriate penalty is reclusion perpetua.

WHEREFORE, the judgment under review is hereby affirmed with the sole modification that the appellants shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua instead of death Cost against the appellants.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.

Fernando C.J., Teehankee, Aquino, Concepcion Jr., Guerrero De Castro Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Escolin Vasquez, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr. JJ., concur.

 chanrobles virtual law library

Separate Opinions

MAKASIAR, J., dissenting:chanrobles virtual law library

Death penalty should be imposed.

Separate Opinions

MAKASIAR, J., concurring:

Death penalty should be imposed.