Case Digest (G.R. No. 183091)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Bernesto de la Cruz @ Berning, G.R. No. 183091, June 19, 2013, the Supreme Court First Division, Sereno, C.J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellee is the People of the Philippines; the accused-appellant is Bernesto de la Cruz @ Berning.On March 19, 2001 an information for the special complex crime of rape with homicide was filed against appellant, alleging that on May 27, 2000 in Sitio [XXX], San Narciso, Quezon, he raped and, on the occasion of the rape, hacked and beheaded the victim, a married woman (identified by fictitious initials). Appellant pleaded not guilty at arraignment and trial followed.
At trial the prosecution presented circumstantial evidence: the victim’s sister (BBB) went to the mountain farm and saw appellant about ten arm-spans away, clad only in blood-drenched briefs, cutting minongga branches and covering something with them; he discarded a bolo and ran when seen. BBB then found the headless body of the victim nearby, her head several meters from the body, her undergarments missing. The medico-legal examiner found spermatozoa in the victim’s vaginal smear and multiple hack wounds, one inflicted ante-mortem. The bolo recovered was determined to be the victim’s. Appellant denied the allegations and claimed he had been working in a different sitio that morning and was fully dressed when he met BBB.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 61, Gumaca, Quezon, rendered a July 5, 2003 judgment finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape with homicide and sentenced him to death; it ordered payment of P75,000 civil indemnity and P50,000 moral damages. On automatic review the Court of Appeals (CA) in a December 28, 2007 decision affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and adjusted the damages to P50,000 death indemnity, P50,000 civil indemnit...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the conviction for the special complex crime of rape with homicide properly affirmed on the basis of circumstantial evidence and the credibility findings of the courts below?
- Should the awards for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary dam...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)