G.R. No. L-28255 - People vs. Magtira y Dela Cruz

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255)

Facts:

Accused, victim, and nature of charges
Accused-appellant Martin Magtira y dela Cruz, then 33 years old, was charged and convicted for the complex crime of rape with homicide committed against ten-year old Clarita S. Constantino.
The trial court imposed the supreme penalty of death.
The trial court also ordered accused-appellant to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the sum of P 6,000.00, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs.
No one saw the actual commission of the crime.
The trial court found guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on (a) accused-appellant’s statement before the Municipal Court of Masinloc, Zambales (Exhibits “C” and “C-1”) admitting authorship and (b) evidence of corpus delicti and a web of circumstantial evidence allegedly virtually trapping accused-appellant into not being able to successfully deny the commission.

Appellate review and assigned errors
Because the sentence was death, the case underwent automatic review.
Accused-appellant, through counsel de oficio, raised these assignment of errors:

The lower court erred in admitting Exhibits “C,” “C-1,” the alleged statement of the accused, and Exhibit “E.”
The lower court erred in not holding that the prosecution’s circumstantial evidence failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The lower court erred in not acquitting the accused.

Prosecution evidence: circumstances leading to discovery of the victim
In June 1967, complainant Juanita Sarmiento, a 30-year old widow, resided in barrio Baluganon, Masinloc, Zambales, with her children Clarita (almost 11 years old), Valeriano (8), and Carmelita (6), all surnamed Constantino.
Approximately 30 meters from complainant’s house lived accused-appellant Martin Magtira, known in the neighborhood as “Pocol” because he had a blinded right eye and an amputated left arm two inches below the elbow.
At about 2:00 p.m. of June 9, 1967, Clarita, Valeriano, and Carmelita played on the road in front of accused-appellant’s house.
Accused-appellant, who was in the second floor of his house, beckoned Clarita to come up.
Clarita went up the house.
Accused-appellant gestured Valeriano and Carmelita to go away, and they left.
At about 4:00 p.m., complainant noticed Clarita had not returned home.
Complainant asked Valeriano and Carmelita where their sister was; neither knew.
Complainant scoured the neighborhood without finding Clarita.
Complainant later asked Valeriano where he left Clarita earlier; Valeriano recalled that Martin Magtira called Clarita to his house.
Complainant, along with her aunt and neighbor Susan Olivo, went to look for accused-appellant.
They saw accused-appellant walking along the railroad tracks in the barrio.
Complainant asked accused-appellant if he had seen Clarita; accused-appellant answered in the negative.
Complainant and the two women proceeded to accused-appellant’s house without him.
In the second floor, in the back room, complainant found Clarita lying on the bamboo floor covered by a mat.
Lifting the cover, complainant saw the child dead, arms and legs spread apart, with her red dress (Exhibit F) stained with blood in front and at the back.
Raising the dress, complainant found the child was without a panty, exposing her vagina.
In the vagina, complainant found a portion of a man’s sweatshirt (Exhibit G) inserted.
Complainant cried in anguish upon embracing Clarita’s cold and lifeless body.

Police intervention and postmortem findings: corpus delicti
At about 11:30 p.m. of the same day, Masinloc chief of police Raymundo Buenaventura received a report that the dead body of a young girl was found in accused-appellant’s house.
The chief of police fetched Municipal Judge Gerardo Elicano and Municipal Health Officer Dr. Diosdado Asuncion.
The officials repaired to accused-appellant’s house and saw Clarita’s dead body lying on the bamboo floor.
Dr. Asuncion conducted a postmortem examination with these findings:

Lacerated hymen
Vaginal hemorrhage
Lacerations, anterior and posterior commissures of the vagina
Echymosis, medial aspect of the upper third of both thighs
Echymosis, lateral aspect of the upper third of left thigh
Contusion-abrasion, anterior aspect of neck

Dr. Asuncion stated Clarita must have been dead for more than six hours because the body was already in complete rigor mortis.
Dr. Asuncion opined the lacerated hymen and vaginal lacerations resulted from insertion of a blunt object like a penis into the vagina.
Dr. Asuncion found a combination of fresh and clotted blood in the vaginal cavity and fresh and clotted blood on the floor underneath the vagina.
Dr. Asuncion also opined the lacerations on the folds of skin at both ends of the vagina could have been caused by insertion of a forceful blunt object like a penis.
Dr. Asuncion testified echymosis on the thighs could have been caused by forceful application of a blunt object such as fist blows or kicks.
The contusion and abrasion on the neck were attributed to a blunt instrument in a rubbing motion.
Dr. Asuncion attributed death to strangulation, supported by the slightly protruding tongue, aggravated by hemorrhage.

Accused’s arrest and confession/statement evidence
While Dr. Asuncion examined the body, police chief Buenaventura saw accused-appellant among the people on the second floor.
Buenaventura arrested accused-appellant.
Buenaventura took accused-appellant to D’Chrome, a restaurant in the barrio, where he investigated him.
Accused-appellant denied involvement and invoked alibi.
Accused-appellant was later brought to the police headquarters in Masinloc.
The police chief summoned complainant Juanita Sarmiento and Valeriano Constantino.
The chief of police told accused-appellant that if he told the truth, he would help him.
Accused-appellant then confessed to the police chief that he raped and killed Clarita Constantino.
The confession was reduced in writing by Pat. Abraham Vengua as Exhibit B.
Municipal Judge Elicano, on the morning of June 10, 1967, read in Tagalog accused-appellant’s statement in Tagalog (Exhibit B) and then had accused-appellant swear and sign it before the judge.
Municipal Judge Elicano conducted a preliminary examination that was reduced in writing as Exhibits “C” and “C-1.”
In Exhibits “C” and “C-1,” accused-appellant reiterated and affirmed his extra-judicial confession that he raped and killed Clarita Constantino.
The pertinent portions of Exhibits “C” and “C-1” quoted in the decision showed, among others, accused-appellant’s acknowledgment that Clarita was the child he raped and killed and the method of strangulation “with two knees” until breathing stopped.

Additional evidentiary proof: physical exhibits and laboratory examination
Lucena Mesias, a laundress living in barrio Baluganon, testified that at about 3:00 p.m. on June 9, 1969 (as stated in the text), accused-appellant arrived at her house and asked her to wash his trousers, Exhibit J, which was rolled.
Mesias excused herself due to her daughter being sick, but accused-appellant left the pants at the corner of her house.
On June 10, 1967, Mesias went to see accused-appellant’s aunt, Barbara de la Cruz, and told her that accused-appellant’s pants had been left with her.
Mesias asked Barbara to take the trousers from her house.
Barbara’s son, Pedro Garcia, retrieved Exhibit J from Mesias’s house.
When Barbara saw the pants, blood stains were around the area of the opening and the pants had an acrid odor.
Barbara turned over the pants to Pat. Juan Morales.
The red dress (Exhibit F), the sweatshirt (Exhibit G) portion found inserted in the vagina, and the pair of pants (Exhibit J) were submitted for laboratory examination to the Zambales Provincial Hospital.
Dr. Felixberto Valdez conducted a chemical examination and found the stains on Exhibit F, on the right sleeve of Exhibit G, and on the area around the opening of Exhibit J were all blood.
Dr. Valdez could not determine whether the blood was human because the blood cells had already deteriorated.

Accused’s defense evidence and attack on admissibility/credibility
Accused-appellant presented a different factual account to establish alibi and challenged admissibility of his sworn statement.
Accused-appellant alleged he lived in Barrio Baluganon since 1963, suffering from a blind right eye and a left arm cut two inches below the elbow.
He alleged he started living with Juanita Sarmiento in October 1966, but the common-law relationship lasted about two months; he then took Remedios Doctolero as his new common-law wife in the same barrio.
Accused-appellant claimed that at about 1:00 a.m. dawn of June 9, 1969 (as stated in the text), he started drinking with Josie, Manuel Alberto, and Erning at his rented house.
Juanita Sarmiento reportedly joined them; they drank and conversed until 12:00 noon.
The group reportedly went to D’Chrome Restaurant for lunch except Josie, who remained a hostess.
They allegedly returned to accused-appellant’s rented house, where children including Clarita played in front due to the presence of their mother.
Accused-appellant and Josie allegedly left the first floor to go to the house of a “Tomoy” while Sarmiento and Manuel Alberto remained.
Josie allegedly left for Iba, Zambales by a Victory Liner bus at about 2:30 p.m.
Accused-appellant allegedly went to his mother’s house and stayed until about 6:00 p.m.
On the way, he allegedly met complainant Juanita Sarmiento, who asked about Clarita; accused-appellant allegedly answered he did not know.
Accused-appellant then allegedly drank with Manuel Alberto and companions and later went to a gambling house at Mrs. Montero’s residence, then later to his rented house after being called by a son of Susan Olivo for more drinks and pulutan.
Accused-appellant allegedly learned only after reaching his rented house that someone was found dead on the second floor.
He allegedly went up but was prevented from reaching the cadaver by the chief of police.
Accused-appe

Unlock Full Case Digest

Supreme Court E-Library

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255)
Concise

Facts:

Issues:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255)

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255) Concise

Facts:

Issues:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255)

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-28255)
Concise