ChanRobles Virtual law Library
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
SECOND DIVISION G.R. No. 185012 : March 5, 2010 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. VICTOR VILLARINO y MABUTE, Appellant. D E C I S I O N DEL CASTILLO, J.: In this special complex crime of rape with homicide, the unsolicited and spontaneous confession of guilt by the appellant to the police officer is admissible in evidence. The circumstantial evidence is also sufficient to sustain the conviction of the appellant even if no spermatozoa was found in the victims body during an autopsy. Factual Antecedents On August 3, 1995, an Information That on or about the 29th day of April, 1995, at about 5:00 oclock in the afternoon, at Barangay "D1", Municipality of Almagro, Province of Samar, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, with lewd design, by means of force, violence and intimidation, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge against a minor ten (10) years [sic], "AAA", CONTRARY TO LAW.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. After the termination of the pre-trial conference, trial ensued. The Version of the Prosecution The case against the appellant, as culled from the evidence presented by the prosecution, is as follows: On April 28, 1995, "BBB", together with her 10-year old daughter "AAA" and her younger son "CCC" went to the house of their relative in Barangay "D" to attend the fiesta to be held the next day. On even date, from 7:00 oclock to 9:00 oclock in the evening, SPO4 Jesus Genoguin (SPO4 Genoguin) was in his house in Barangay "D" entertaining his guests, one of whom was appellant. While personally serving food and drinks to appellant, SP04 Genoguin noticed that the latter was wearing a bracelet and a necklace with pendant. Appellant even allowed SPO4 Genoguin to put on the bracelet. On April 29, 1995, at around 9:00 oclock in the morning, the appellant who was on his way to Barangay "D", passed by the house of Rodrigo Olaje (Rodrigo). At that time, Rodrigo noticed appellant wearing a bracelet and a necklace with pendant. He was also wearing a white sleeveless t-shirt (sando). At 11:00 oclock in the morning, appellant was at the house of "BBBs" aunt. "BBB" offered him food. "BBB" also noticed that he was dressed in a white sando and that he wore jewelry consisting of a bracelet and a necklace with pendant. At around 3:00 oclock in the afternoon, "BBB" told "AAA" to go home to Barangay "D1" to get a t-shirt for her brother. "AAA" obeyed. However, she no longer returned. While "BBB" was anxiously waiting for "AAA" in the house of her aunt in Barangay "D", At around 4:00 oclock in the afternoon, Rodrigo, who was the barangay captain of Barangay "D1" received information that a dead child was found in their barangay. He instructed a barangay tanod to inform the police about the incident. Thereafter, Rodrigo proceeded to the specified area together with other barangay tanods. SPO4 Genoguin also went to the crime scene after being informed by his commander. "AAAs" lifeless body lay face up with her buttocks on top of a small rock. Her body was slanted downward with her legs spread apart and dangling on the sides of the small boulder. She was no longer wearing short pants and panty, and blood oozed from her vagina. Wrapped around her right hand, which was positioned near her right ear, was a white sando. "AAAs" panty was found a meter away from her body, while her short pants was about two meters farther. A bracelet and a pendant were also recovered from the crime scene. Rodrigo and "BBB" identified these pieces of jewelry as those seen on the appellant. They also identified the sando on "AAAs" arm as the appellants. On the same day, the appellant was found in the house of Aurelia Susmena near the seashore of Barangay "D1". He was drunk and violent. He resisted arrest and had to be bodily carried to the motorboat that would take him to the municipal building in Almagro, Samar. The arresting team made the appellant take off his clothes since they were wet. When he complied, his briefs revealed bloodstains. "AAAs" corpse was taken to Calbayog District Hospital for autopsy. The Medico Legal Necropsy Report indicated the following injuries sustained by "AAA":
cralawHypovolomic shock secondary to Massive Hemorrhage, secondary to third degree vaginal laceration. Dr. Arleen P. Lim, Medical Officer III, testified that four of the five lacerated wounds could have been caused by a hard irregular or blunt object, like a rock or stone. Due to the death of "AAA", "BBB" incurred (1) On May 2, 1995, the police brought appellant to Calbayog City for medical examination since he had scratches and abrasions on his body. While waiting for a boat ride at 4:00 oclock in the morning, the police team took a coffee break. SPO4 Genoguin was momentarily left alone to guard the appellant. During this short period, the appellant voluntarily admitted to SPO4 Genoguin that he committed the crime charged. He also told SPO4 Genoguin that he could keep the pendant and bracelet if he would retrieve the t-shirt and throw it into the sea. SPO4 Genoguin rejected the appellants offer and reminded him of his right to a counsel and that everything the appellant said could be used against him in court. Unperturbed, the appellant reiterated his offer. When they boarded the motorboat, the appellant repeatedly offered to give SPO4 Genoguin At the Calbayog District Hospital, Senior Resident Physician Dr. Jose V. Ong, found that appellants body had 10 healed abrasions and two linear abrasions or scratches, particularly, on his breast, knees, as well as right and left ears, that could have been caused by fingernails. The Version of the Appellant In the afternoon of April 29, 1995, the appellant and his mother were at the residence of Aurelia Susmena. The appellant was sleeping in a hammock when he was abruptly awakened by Rodrigo, SPO4 Genoguin, and several policemen and barangay tanods. They tied his hands and feet with a nylon rope, and dragged him towards the seashore. Rodrigo hit the nape of the appellant with a gun then poked it at the appellants mother, who wanted to help him. The appellant was then forcibly loaded in a motorboat. The appellant denied owning the bracelet, the pendant, and the sando found at the scene of the crime. He claimed it was impossible for him to buy these pieces of jewelry since he was only a cook in the fishing venture managed by Rodrigo. He maintained that he was not even paid for his services, for which reason he abandoned his work. This resulted in the failure of the fishing venture to operate for a day, which allegedly angered Rodrigo making him testify against him. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court On May 19, 1999, the Regional Trial Court of Calbayog City, Branch 32 rendered a Decision WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered, finding the accused, VICTOR VILLARINO y Mabute, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape with Homicide of a ten-year old minor, for which he is hereby sentenced to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH, as provided for under R.A. No. 7659, to pay the complainant, BBB, the sum of IT IS SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary The Verdict of the Court of Appeals The Court of Appeals (CA) found the appellant guilty only of homicide. The dispositive portion of its Decision WHEREFORE, the Decision dated May 19, 1999, of the RTC of Calbayog City, in Criminal Case No. 2069 is MODIFIED. As modified, accused-appellant VICTOR VILLARINO y MABUTE is found GUILTY of HOMICIDE and he is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty ranging from twelve (12) years of prision mayor in its maximum period, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal in its medium period, as maximum. The appealed Decision is AFFIRMED in all other respects. SO ORDERED. Still unsatisfied, the appellant comes to us raising the following assignment of errors: Issues
Our Ruling The appeal lacks merit.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary In the special complex crime of rape with homicide, the following elements must concur: (1) the appellant had carnal knowledge of a woman; (2) carnal knowledge of a woman was achieved by means of force, threat or intimidation; and (3) by reason or on occasion of such carnal knowledge by means of force, threat or intimidation, the appellant killed a woman. In the instant case, appellant voluntarily confessed to raping and killing "AAA" to SPO4 Genoguin. He even offered to give the pieces of jewelry to the latter if his sando is thrown into the sea. The appellant did not deny this accusation nor assail its truthfulness.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary When appellant confessed to the crime, he was alone with SPO4 Genoguin, and no force or intimidation was employed against him. The confession was spontaneously made and not elicited through questioning. The trial court did not, therefore, err in holding that compliance with the constitutional procedure on custodial interrogation is not applicable in the instant case. In People v. Dy, Contrary to the defense contention, the oral confession made by the Accused to Pat. Padilla that "he had shot a tourist" and that the gun he had used in shooting the victim was in his bar which he wanted surrendered to the Chief of Police (t.s.n., October 17, 1984, pp. 6-9), is competent evidence against him. The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged may be given in evidence against him (Sec. 29, Rule 130, Rules of Court). It may in a sense be also regarded as part of the res gestae. The rule is that, any person, otherwise competent as a witness, who heard the confession, is competent to testify as to the substance of what he heard if he heard and understood all of it. An oral confession need not be repeated verbatim, but in such a case it must be given in substance (23 C.J.S. 196, cited in People v. Tawat, G.R. No. 62871, May 25, 1985, 129 SCRA 431).chanroblesvirtua|awlibary What was told by the Accused to Pat. Padilla was a spontaneous statement not elicited through questioning, but given in an ordinary manner. No written confession was sought to be presented in evidence as a result of formal custodial investigation. (People v. Taylaran, G.R. No. L-19149, October 31, 1981, 108 SCRA 373). The Trial Court, therefore, cannot be held to have erred in holding that compliance with the constitutional procedure on custodial interrogation is not applicable in the instant case, as the defense alleges in its Error VII. At any rate, even without his confession, appellant could still be convicted of the complex crime of rape with homicide. The prosecution established his complicity in the crime through circumstantial evidence which were credible and sufficient, and led to the inescapable conclusion that the appellant committed the complex crime of rape with homicide. When considered together, the circumstances point to the appellant as the culprit.
cralawThe appellant argues that the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses which were replete with contradictions and improbabilities. According to him, Rodrigos declaration that it was around 2:00 oclock in the afternoon of April 29, 1995 when he was told of the discovery of a dead body contradicts "BBBs" testimony that she instructed the victim to go home to Barangay "D1" at around 3:00 oclock in the afternoon of the same day. Moreover, Rodrigos claim that the appellant, a fisherman, always wore the pieces of jewelry in question while at work, is contrary to human experience. Lastly, SPO4 Genoguins contention that he saw appellant wearing the pieces of jewelry on separate occasions prior to the commission of the crime is inconsistent with his subsequent testimony that he was not even sure of the ownership of the said jewelry.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Appellants contentions are not worthy of credence. A perusal of the transcript of stenographic notes reveals that it was Prosecutor Feliciano Aguilar who supplied the time of 2:00 oclock in the afternoon when Rodrigo was informed that a dead body of a child was found, thus:
cralawMoreover, the time when Rodrigo was informed of the incident and the time stated by "BBB" when she sent "AAA" on an errand to Barangay "D1", were mere approximations, which cannot impair their credibility. An error in the estimation of time does not discredit the testimony of a witness when time is not an essential element. The inconsistencies indicated by the appellant are likewise inconsequential since they do not detract from the fact that "BBB" sent "AAA" on an errand in Barangay "D1" where her dead body was later discovered. Far from being badges of fraud and fabrication, the discrepancies in the testimonies of witnesses may be justifiably considered as indicative of the truthfulness on material points of the facts testified to. These minor deviations also confirm that the witnesses had not been rehearsed. The credibility of SPO4 Genoguin is not adversely affected by his inability to immediately identify the ownership of the jewelry found near the dead body of the victim despite his testimony that he saw the appellant wearing the same jewelry on previous occasions. The workings of a human mind placed under emotional stress are unpredictable leading people to act differently. In sum, the inconsistencies raised by the appellant are too inconsequential to warrant a reversal of the trial courts ruling. The decisive factor in the prosecution for rape with homicide is whether the commission of the crime has been sufficiently proven. For a discrepancy or inconsistency in the testimony of a witness to serve as a basis for acquittal, it must establish beyond doubt the innocence of the appellant for the crime charged. The appellant imputes improper motive to witness Rodrigo who, allegedly, had an axe to grind against him because Rodrigos fishing venture incurred huge losses after appellant abandoned his job as a cook. Such imputation, however, deserves scant consideration. Other than appellants self-serving allegation, there is no proof that his sudden departure from work adversely affected the operations of the fishing venture.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Against the prosecutions evidence, the appellant could only offer a mere denial and alibi. However, denial and alibi are intrinsically weak defenses and must be supported by strong evidence of non-culpability in order to be credible. Courts likewise view the defense of alibi with suspicion and caution, not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable, but also because it can be fabricated easily. Besides, in order for alibi to prosper, it is not enough to prove that the appellant was somewhere else during the commission of the crime; it must also be shown that it would have been impossible for him to be anywhere within the vicinity of the crime scene. Hence, the appellants twin defenses of denial and alibi pale in the light of the array of circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution. The CA ruled that the evidence adduced by the prosecution are sufficient to produce a conviction for homicide but not for the crime of rape. In so ruling, the CA ratiocinated that while there were lacerations in the vaginal orifice of the victim, the absence of spermatozoa, however, belied that she was raped.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary We disagree. The absence of spermatozoa does not necessarily result in the conclusion that rape was not committed. Here, we reiterate that there is an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence from which we can infer that the appellant raped "AAA". In a secluded area, her undisturbed corpse was discovered lying face-up and slanting downward with her buttocks on top of a small boulder. Her 10-year old lifeless body was naked from waist down with legs spread apart and dangling from the rock. Blood oozed from the vaginal orifice. Wrapped around her right hand was the appellants sando. Her shorts were found a few meters away, just like the appellants pendant and bracelet. Moreover, the appellant confessed to having raped "AAA". These circumstances lead to one fair and reasonable conclusion that appellant raped and murdered "AAA". The Penalty Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to RA 7659 The Damages In line with current jurisprudence, WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00065 is MODIFIED. Appellant Victor Villarino y Mabute is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of rape with homicide and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and to pay the heirs of "AAA" the amounts of SO ORDERED. MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO WE CONCUR: ANTONIO T. CARPIO
JOSE P. PEREZ A T T E S T A T I O N I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division. ANTONIO T. CARPIO C E R T I F I C A T I O N Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, and the Division Chairpersons attestation, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division. REYNATO S. PUNO cralaw Endnotes:
|
|