PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. GERRY
LIPATA Y ORTIZA
G.R. No. 200302 April 20, 2016
CARPIO, J.
FACTS:
On or about the 1st day of September, 2005, the said
accused, conspiring, confederating with two (2) other persons whose true names,
identities and definite whereabouts have not as yet been ascertained and
mutually helping one another, with intent to kill and with evident
premeditation and treachery, and taking advantage of superior strength, did,
then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and employ
personal violence upon the person of one RONALDO CUENO Y BONIFACIO, by then and
there stabbing him repeatedly with bladed weapons, hitting him on the different
parts of his body, thereby inflicting upon him serious and mortal stab wounds
which were the direct and immediate cause of his death.
The RTC noted that since appellant raised the
justifying circumstance of defense of a relative, he hypothetically admitted
the commission of the crime. Hence, the burden of proving his innocence shifted
to appellant. The RTC found that the defense failed to adequately establish the
element of unlawful aggression on the part of Cueno. There was no actual or
imminent danger to the life of appellant or of his brother Larry. On the
contrary, the three Lipata brothers (appellant, Larry, and Rudy) employed
treachery and took advantage of their superior strength when they attacked
Cueno after Cueno left the house of his sister-in-law. Cueno suffered 17 stab
wounds on his trunk from the Lipata brothers. The CA dismissed appellant's
appeal and affirmed the decision of the RTC. However, prior to the promulgation
of the CA’s decision, the Quezon City Jail Warden informed the Court that
appellant passed away on 13 February 2011.
ISSUE:
Whether the accused’s death pending appeal
extinguished his criminal liability.
RULING:
Yes. At the outset, we declare that because of
appellant's death prior to the promulgation of the CA's decision, there is no
further need to determine appellant's criminal liability. Appellant's death has
the effect of extinguishing his criminal liability.
The old rule that the acquittal of the accused in a
criminal case also releases him from civil liability is one of the most serious
flaws in the Philippine legal system. This is one of those cases where confused
thinking leads to unfortunate and deplorable consequences. Such reasoning fails
to draw a clear line of demarcation between criminal liability and civil
responsibility, and to determine the logical result of the distinction. The two
liabilities are separate and distinct from each other. One affects the social
order and the other, private rights. One is for the punishment or correction of
the offender while the other is for reparation of damages suffered by the
aggrieved party.
Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally
extinguished. - Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
1.
By the death of the convict, as to the
personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is
extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.
X X X
Comments
Post a Comment