G.R. No. L-23638 - Ferdez vs. Dimagiba

On October 5, 1995, in the early morning at Maitum Highway, within Barangay Puerto, Cagayan de Oro City, a tragic vehicular incident occurred during an "endurance run" by PNP trainees.
An Isuzu Elf truck, driven by Glenn de los Santos (the accused-appellant), struck a formation of police trainees and rear security guards, resulting in multiple deaths, serious injuries, and minor injuries.
The victims included members of the Philippine National Police undergoing a Special Counter Insurgency Operation Unit Training, with the formation arranged in three lines to run from Camp Damilag, Bukidnon, to Camp Alagar in Cagayan de Oro City.

The PNP trainees were divided into three columns (two columns of 22 and one column of 21) all running in close formation on the wrong side of the highway, with their backs turned to the oncoming vehicle.
Rear security guards accompanied the columns, tasked with signaling vehicles to switch lanes, but their efforts were insufficient as the accused did not heed their warnings.
Specific victims who were killed or fatally injured (some dying on the spot and another days later) were enumerated, along with a separate group sustaining serious as well as slight physical injuries.

Testimonies from prosecution witnesses (such as rear guards and police investigators) detailed that the Isuzu Elf was involved in a high-speed collision, with the vehicle sustaining significant damage (broken windshield, damaged headlights, bumpers, and mirrors).
The scene revealed a long trail of bloodstains, consistent with a high-impact collision without any brake or skid marks, indicating that the brakes were not engaged.
Weather conditions at the time were adverse: dark, overcast skies with heavy cloud cover, absence of moonlight or starlight, and occasional rain that contributed to reduced visibility and slippery roads.

GLENN testified that earlier on October 4, 1995, he had been engaged in transporting band members and equipment, and had consumed at least three bottles of pale pilsen beer.
He described an incident where, while driving at reduced speed (from 80 to 60 km/hr) after encountering bright headlights from an oncoming vehicle, he suddenly heard “bumping thuds.”
In his account, fear and confusion set in due to temporarily blinding lights, causing him to apply brakes too late; he could not determine what he had struck due to the darkness, and only realized the damage after returning home.
Subsequent events led him to surrender upon hearing reports of the accident.

The trial court, after an ocular inspection with the prosecution, the accused, and his counsel, initially charged GLENN with multiple murder, multiple frustrated murder, and multiple attempted murder under Article 248 in relation to Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code.
Both prosecution and defense presented extensive evidence, including testimonies of several eyewitnesses, physical evidence from the truck, observations from weather reports, and expert explanations regarding the absence of brake marks and the highway conditions.
The prosecution suggested that GLENN acted out of “mischief and dare-devilness” exacerbated by his state of intoxication, while the defense posited that factors such as poor visibility, slippery road conditions, and the physics of a heavy vehicle contributed to what was essentially an accident rather than an intentional felony.

In its decision dated August 26, 1997, the trial court convicted GLENN of the complex crime of multiple murder, multiple frustrated murder, and multiple attempted murder, imposing the death penalty along with monetary awards for indemnities.
The case was set for automatic review, with GLENN challenging three main findings:

That he deliberately caused his truck to hit the trainees despite being signaled by the rear guards;
That he accelerated the vehicle after the first impact; and
That he had ample distance (150 meters) to avoid the accident despite adverse conditions.

Whether the evidence supports a finding of deliberate intent to kill (and thus the commission of murder, frustrated murder, and attempted murder) or whether the tragic outcome was the result of negligent, reckless driving.
The role of intoxication and the accused’s state of mind in establishing criminal intent.

Whether the accused’s failure to apply the brakes or to swerve the vehicle constitutes an act of gross negligence sufficient to trigger criminal liability.
The significance of the absence of brake marks and whether it proves intentional acceleration or merely the momentum of a heavy vehicle under adverse conditions.

The need to weigh the prosecution’s portrayal of a “dare-devil” act against the defense’s explanation of accidental collision due to environmental and vehicular factors.
Assessing the importance of circumstantial evidence (weather, darkness, road conditions, formation of victims) in establishing a reasonable doubt regarding deliberate malice.

The legality and validity of charging GLENN for multiple offenses in a single information and whether his failure to object to the multiplicity affects his conviction.

The impact of GLENN’s failure to render assistance to the victims on the imposition of a higher degree of penalty.
How the application of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code and the Indeterminate Sentence Law affect the final sentencing.