G.R. No. L-40352 - People vs. Francisco

Background of the homicide and immediate circumstances
On or about 7:30 in the evening of July 20, 1971, while Esteban de la Cruz was sitting on a chair at the porch of the house of Jacinto Perez at Matarling, Isabela, Basilan City, the deceased was shot once by an unknown assassin with a shotgun, the shot hitting the head and causing instant death.
The prosecution later failed to present any eyewitness to the commission of the crime and relied solely on an alleged extrajudicial confession of Felicisimo Francisco.

Arrest, investigation, and alleged confession
On December 2, 1972, the appellant (Felicisimo Francisco) was arrested by the Chief of Police of Guilingan, Zamboanga del Sur, and he was brought to the NBI Office in Zamboanga City on the following day for investigation.
During the investigation, the appellant allegedly executed a confession on the NBI investigation.
The confession allegedly admitted that the appellant killed the deceased in the evening of July 20, 1971.

Filing of the murder charge and plea
On May 24, 1974, the appellant was charged in the Court of First Instance of Basilan City with the crime of murder, docketed as Criminal Case No. 485.
Upon arraignment, the appellant pleaded not guilty.

Trial evidence and the prosecution’s reliance on the confession
Trial proceeded with both parties presenting evidence.
The prosecution presented no eyewitness; it relied solely on the appellant’s alleged extrajudicial confession.
The appellant, testifying in his defense, repudiated the confession and claimed that NBI agents maltreated and tortured him until he was forced to sign a prepared statement.

Trial court disposition
The trial court rejected the appellant’s claim of maltreatment and found that the confession was executed freely and voluntarily.
The trial court convicted the appellant of murder beyond reasonable doubt a...(Subscriber-Only)

Procedural issue on the effect of the appellant’s escape during the appeal
Whether the appeal should have been dismissed under Section 8, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court due to the appellant’s escape from prison or confinement during the pendency of the appeal.

Substantive issue on the admissibility and voluntariness of the alleged extrajudicial confession
Whether the alleged extrajudicial confession was executed by the appellant freely and voluntarily, or whether it was extorted through violence and intimidation.
Whether the prosecution, after the appellant repudiated the confession, sufficiently impeached the repudiation.
Whether the trial court erred in its evaluation of evidence supporting voluntariness, including the testimony of the court witness presented to establish voluntariness.

Issues bearing on reliability and sufficiency of the confession as the sole basis for conviction
Whether the confession was corroborated by other reliable evidence, considering the trial court’s reliance on witnesses and other factors.
Whether inconsistencies, translation processes, and the...(Subscriber-Only)