G.R. Nos. L-103685-86 - DECEMBER 1993 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. Nos. L-103685-86December 27, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Christopher Fernandez, et al. G.R. No. L-110736December 27, 1993 Walter T. Young vs. Office of the Ombudsman, et al. G.R. Nos. 76142-43December 27, 1993 VDA Fish Broker vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-104033December 27, 1993 Noe S. Andaya vs. Lisandro C. Abadia, et Al G.R. No. L-106822December 21, 1993 Flordeliz L. Bellido, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-106528December 21, 1993 Phil. Columbian Assoc. vs. Domingo D. Panis, et al. G.R. No. 98124December 21, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Nestor Abella G.R. No. 90267December 21, 1993 Perlita Lopez vs. Employees Compensation Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-88751December 21, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Felipe Segundo, et al. G.R. No. L-68209December 21, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Rogelio C. Ramos A.M. No. MTJ-93-860December 21, 1993 Elpidio Sy vs. Emelita Habacon-Garayblas G.R. No. L-107819December 17, 1993 Efren Anciro vs. People of the Philippines, et al. G.R. No. L-106197December 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Philip Felix B. Cadocio G.R. No. L-106091December 17, 1993 Jose "Peping" Navarro vs. Commission on Elections, et al. G.R. No. L-107330December 17, 1993 Edgar N. Rapisora vs. Civil Service Commission G.R. No. L-105666December 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Juan G. Gundran, et al. G.R. No. L-105450December 17, 1993 Pedro S. Limjoco, Sr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-104437December 17, 1993 Phil. National Construction Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-103679December 17, 1993 Arsenio Zurbano, Sr. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-100831December 17, 1993 Reliance Commodities, Inc. vs. Daewoo Industrial Co., Ltd. G.R. No. L-71504December 17, 1993 Enieda Montilla vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-105190December 16, 1993 BA Finance Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 97618December 16, 1993 Ismael Mathay, Jr. vs. Victor C. Macalincag, et al. G.R. No. L-110687December 15, 1993 Rolando G. Ocampo, et al. vs. Bartolome Carale, et al. G.R. No. L-105586December 15, 1993 Remigio Isidro vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. L-101579-82December 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Lucille B. Sendon G.R. Nos. L-100938-39December 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Blademir Devaras, et al. G.R. No. L-98368December 15, 1993 Opulencia Ice Plant, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-87799December 15, 1993 Sunset View Cond. Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-83215December 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Odon Surigawan G.R. No. L-70305December 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Alfredo M. Nito G.R. No. L-107107December 14, 1993 Benjamin M. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-103733December 14, 1993 Insular Bank of Asia And America vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-104874December 14, 1993 Danilo Hernandez vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 88983December 14, 1993 Sps Luis Ilasco, Jr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-110434December 13, 1993 Hi-Precision Steel Center, Inc. vs. Lim Kim Steel Builders, Inc., et al. G.R. No. L-106920December 10, 1993 Phil. Banking Corp. vs. Salvador S. Tensuan, et al. G.R. No. L-105395December 10, 1993 Bank of America, NT & SA, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 105122December 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Bienvenido T. Rafols, et al. G.R. No. 97170December 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Rudy Mosende G.R. No. L-92174December 10, 1993 Boie-Takeda Chemicals, Inc. vs. Dionisio De La Serna G.R. No. L-105072December 9, 1993 Domingo Gelindon, et al. vs. Jose De La Rama, et al. G.R. No. 92150December 8, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Efren Malakas G.R. No. 90019December 8, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Wilfredo B. Fernandez G.R. No. L-106098December 7, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Danilo B. Gonzales G.R. No. L-105692December 7, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Roger Genial, et al. G.R. No. L-105581December 7, 1994 People of the Philippines vs. Elmer M. De Asis G.R. No. L-105293December 7, 1993 Tomas B. Carlos vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-101793December 7, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Melchor Olarte A.M. No. RTJ-92-904December 7, 1993 Norbert J. Alfonso vs. Modesto C. Juanson A.C. No. 2029December 7, 1993 Luis G. Constantino vs. Prudencio G. Saludares G.R. No. L-109266December 2, 1993 Miriam Defensor Santiago vs. Francis Garchitorena, et al. G.R. No. L-108740December 1, 1993 University of the Philippines vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. A.M. No. P-90-424December 1, 1993 Wenceslao Nuez vs. Agerico Balles The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Christopher Fernandez, et al. Walter T. Young vs. Office of the Ombudsman, et al. VDA Fish Broker vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Noe S. Andaya vs. Lisandro C. Abadia, et Al Flordeliz L. Bellido, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Phil. Columbian Assoc. vs. Domingo D. Panis, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Nestor Abella Perlita Lopez vs. Employees Compensation Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Felipe Segundo, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Rogelio C. Ramos Elpidio Sy vs. Emelita Habacon-Garayblas Efren Anciro vs. People of the Philippines, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Philip Felix B. Cadocio Jose "Peping" Navarro vs. Commission on Elections, et al. Edgar N. Rapisora vs. Civil Service Commission People of the Philippines vs. Juan G. Gundran, et al. Pedro S. Limjoco, Sr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Phil. National Construction Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Arsenio Zurbano, Sr. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Reliance Commodities, Inc. vs. Daewoo Industrial Co., Ltd. Enieda Montilla vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. BA Finance Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Ismael Mathay, Jr. vs. Victor C. Macalincag, et al. Rolando G. Ocampo, et al. vs. Bartolome Carale, et al. Remigio Isidro vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Lucille B. Sendon People of the Philippines vs. Blademir Devaras, et al. Opulencia Ice Plant, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Sunset View Cond. Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Odon Surigawan People of the Philippines vs. Alfredo M. Nito Benjamin M. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Insular Bank of Asia And America vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Danilo Hernandez vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Sps Luis Ilasco, Jr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Hi-Precision Steel Center, Inc. vs. Lim Kim Steel Builders, Inc., et al. Phil. Banking Corp. vs. Salvador S. Tensuan, et al. Bank of America, NT & SA, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Bienvenido T. Rafols, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Rudy Mosende Boie-Takeda Chemicals, Inc. vs. Dionisio De La Serna Domingo Gelindon, et al. vs. Jose De La Rama, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Efren Malakas People of the Philippines vs. Wilfredo B. Fernandez People of the Philippines vs. Danilo B. Gonzales People of the Philippines vs. Roger Genial, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Elmer M. De Asis Tomas B. Carlos vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Melchor Olarte Norbert J. Alfonso vs. Modesto C. Juanson Luis G. Constantino vs. Prudencio G. Saludares Miriam Defensor Santiago vs. Francis Garchitorena, et al. University of the Philippines vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. Wenceslao Nuez vs. Agerico Balles The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. Nos. L-103685-86 December 27, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
CHRISTOPHER FERNANDEZ AND DIONY FERNANDEZ,accused-appellants.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Public Attorney's Office for accused-appellants.
VITUG,J.:
On 16 February 1990, two informations1were filed with the Regional Trial Court of Malabon —
(1) Criminal Case No. 8967:
That on or about the 23rd day of October, 1989, in the Municipality of Malabon, Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused being then armed with bladed weapons, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping one another with intent to gain and by means of force, violence and intimidation on the person of DANILO HONRADA, JR. Y SUELA did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, rob, and carry away the following:
1. Cash Dollars worth $1,200.00 — P 25,200.00
(equivalent in Pesos)
2. Eight (8) pcs. of necklace — P 70,000.00
3. Ten (10) pcs. of assorted rings — P 60,000.00
4. Seven (7) pcs. bracelet — P 56,000.00
5. Two (2) pcs. of wristwatch Rica — P 4,000.00
6. Seven (7) pcs. of earrings — P 7,000.00
belonging to DANILO HONRADA SR. to his damage and prejudice in the total amount of P150,000.00.2
CONTRARY TO LAW.
(2) Criminal Case No. 8968:
That on or about the 23rd day of October, 1989, in the Municipality of Malabon, Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused conspiring, confederating with Dick Fernandez and Roy Mendiola who are all at large and helping one another, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously kidnap, take and carry away and detain one DANILO HONRADA y SUELA, male of 15 years old, inflicting upon (him) physical injuries coupled with threats to kill him, depriving him of his liberty for three (3) months against his will and consent.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
The two cases were consolidated and tried jointly. The herein accused-appellants pleaded "not guilty" when arraigned on 24 March 1990.
After trial, the court rendered its decision on 13 January 1992, thus —
WHEREFORE, this Court finds both the accused, Christopher Fernandez and Diony Fernandez, in Criminal Case No. 8967 Not Guilty of the crime of Robbery and hereby acquits them of the same. But this Court finds both accused, in Criminal Case No. 8968, Guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Serious Illegal Detention and hereby sentences each of them to suffer a prison term ofReclusion Perpetuaand to pay the cost.
SO ORDERED.
The court relied on its factual findings, which could be gathered, as follows:
On 23 October 1989, at around three o'clock in the morning, after coming from a disco house at C.M. Recto, Manila, Christopher Fernandez, Diony Fernandez, Dick Fernandez and Roy Mendiola accompanied home their companion, Danilo Honrada, Jr., who by that time was already drunk. When they arrived at the latter's residence in Gov. Pascual, Sitio 6, Catmon, Malabon, Metro Manila, Dick Fernandez conducted Honrada upstairs, where Fernandez saw an overnight bag containing pieces of jewelry and money in dollar currency. He took the bag and silenced Honrada's protest by threatening Honrada with a sharp instrument. Fernandez and Honrada returned to their companions downstairs. The group, together with Honrada who was forced to join, went to Monumento, Caloocan, Metro Manila where the pieces of jewelry were sold. They then proceeded to a hilly area in Antipolo, Rizal. Inside a hut, they tied Honrada's hands. Although "untied" the following day, he was, however, threatened not to make any attempt to leave. Christopher Fernandez and Diony Fernandez also stood guard around the premises in order to make sure that no such attempt to escape was made.
After two months in Antipolo, Honrada met Ramon Aguilar of Talon, Antipolo, at a party given by one Del Mundo. Two weeks later, they met again, and Honrada, this time, revealed the fact of his detention and of the robbery. Ramon Aguilar helped Honrada escape. They proceeded to the house of a relative of Honrada in Quiapo, Manila, and later reported the incident to the Malabon Police Headquarters.
The defense gave a totally different version: On 23 October 1989, Nidoy Gonzales, Diony Fernandez, Jolly Fernandez and Christopher Fernandez were in the latter's house in Catmon, Malabon, where they worked as bag (bayong) makers. At around eleven o'clock in the evening, they retired for the day but apparently not for long already at four o'clock the next morning, they hired a passenger jeepney which took them to the bus terminal at Plaza Lawton, Manila. They left for Batangas where they peddled the finished bags. They stayed in Batangas until 26 October 1989.
A familiar and often cited rule is Section 2, Rule 133, of the Revised Rules of Court, which reads:
Sec. 2. In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
Has that moral certainty in this case been proved? Even the Solicitor General pleads for acquittal. Let us see why.
(1) The alleged victim, Danilo Honrada, initially asserted that he did not know accused Christopher Fernandez.3On the same day he gave that testimony, he also stated, without endeavoring to explain himself, that on the day of his supposed abduction, he went to a disco party and among his companions was, in fact, the said accused.4Barely seven after his above testimony, when asked if he had gone to a disco party before being abducted by the several accused, his answer was a categorical "No."5
(2) Honrada testified that he could not escape by himself, because he was, for more than five months, being closely guarded by Christopher and Dick Fernandez.6Later, when asked how long he was detained by the accused, he replied "three months."7
(3) Honrada claimed that he was threatened with a .38 magnum gun8but, when subjected to cross-examination, he admitted that he was not sure of the caliber of the gun.9
(4) Honrada said that Dick Fernandez and Roy Mendiola had brought him to Antipolo, and that it was only two days later (25 October 1990) when he there saw accused Christopher Fernandez and Diony Fernandez.10Recounting the incident, he again changed his mind to say that when brought to the hut, he encountered Christopher and Diony Fernandez, "face-to-face."11
(5) Honrada averred that his hands were tied by Dick Fernandez when he was brought to Monumento before proceeding to Antipolo.12Later, he stated, he was tied only when they reached the hut in Antipolo.13
(6) Honrada at first testified that only his ring was taken from him by the accused.14Later, he said that both his ring and necklace were taken.15
As if the above inconsistencies were not enough, prosecution witness Ramon Aguilar, who allegedly rescued the former, gave statements which belied even more the veracity of the supposed detention. One of their alleged meetings took place in a party at Antipolo given by a barangay captain, a certain Del Mundo, "while the alleged victim was dancing,"16a far cry from the deprivation of freedom that the prosecution desperately tried to portray. The witness also attested having been told at the time by Honrada that he (Honrada) was merely on "vacation in the house of Edgar Mendiola."17
Even the victim's own father testified that when he saw his son, the latter told him, "father it was my mistake" (referring to the "incident").18
Given the foregoing, we cannot see our way clear to sustaining the conviction of the accused-appellants by the trial court below.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the trial court is reversed and set aside. Accused Christopher Fernandez and Diony Fernandez are ACQUITTED of the crime charged, and, if their detention is only on account of their earlier conviction in this case, they are ordered to be IMMEDIATELY RELEASED from confinement.
SO ORDERED.
Feliciano, Bidin, Romero and Melo, JJ., concur.
#Footnotes
1 Four accused are charged in the informations: Christopher Fernandez, Diony Fernandez, John DoealiasDick Fernandez and Peter DoealiasRoy. The first two accused are presently detained at the Malabon Municipal Jail, while the last two accused are at large.
2 The total amount of P222,200.00, originally reflected in the information, was changed to P150,000.00 by the Asst. City Fiscal.
3 TSN, 3 September 1990, p. 3.
4 TSN, 3 September 1990, pp. 4-5.
5 TSN, 10 September, 1990, p. 5.
6 TSN, 3 September 1990, p. 14.
7 TSN, 10 September 1990, p. 4.
8 TSN, 10 September 1990, p. 2.
9 TSN, 10 September 1990, p. 13.
10 TSN, 3 September 1990, pp. 9,11.
11 TSN, 10 September 1990, pp. 14-15.
12 TSN, 3 September 1990, pp. 7-10.
13 TSN, 3 September 1990, pp. 10-11.
14 TSN, 3 September 1990, p. 12.
15 TSN, 10 September 1990, p. 3.
16 TSN, 21 November 1990, pp. 6, 9.
17 TSN, 21 November 1990, p. 11.
18 TSN, 17 September 1990, p. 4.