Case Digest (G.R. No. L-45966)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Mario Mariano y Alejandro alias Negro, G.R. No. L-45966, November 10, 1978, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam. The case is an automatic review of a death sentence rendered by the Circuit Criminal Court, 6th Judicial District, Manila in Criminal Case No. CCC‑VI‑2466.The accused-appellant, Mario Mariano (alias Negro), was charged by information with rape with homicide for acts alleged to have occurred on or about November 11, 1976 against a six‑year‑old girl, Luningning Mapola y Diwata. The information recited that Mariano pinned the child, forced carnal knowledge and that the victim sustained vaginal laceration and head injuries resulting in death. At arraignment on November 19, 1976, after the information was translated into Tagalog, Mariano, assisted initially by counsel de oficio, manifested a plea of guilty; the trial judge warned him repeatedly that the maximum penalty was death.
Because of the gravity of the charge, the trial court set the case for hearing on November 25, 1976 to determine the nature of the crime and the precise culpability of the accused. By then Mariano had private counsel (Atty. Narciso Santiago). The prosecution presented witnesses including the adopted mother of the victim, a 13‑year‑old eyewitness who testified that Mariano whistled at her earlier that day, a patrolman who testified as to an extra‑judicial confession (Exhibit B) and a reenactment, and a medico‑legal officer who testified on the autopsy. The accused likewise testified and denied intent to kill.
On December 13, 1976 the trial court, on its own motion and due to doubts concerning the application of Article 189 in relation to Article 192 of Presidential Decree No. 603, reopened the case to determine the accused’s marital status (material to mitigating/youthful‑offender considerations). Subsequent hearings produced the accused’s marriage certificate (married March 11, 1975) and additional medico‑legal testimony indicating death was due to hemorrhage from vaginal laceration caused by a stiffened male organ or insertion of a blunt object; a defense medico‑legal witness agreed that the head injury was contributory only.
The trial court found Mariano guilty and sentenced him to death, ordering indemnity and moral damages. The judgment was subject to automatic review by the Supreme Court because the penalty of death was imposed. On automatic review, the Court affirmed the conviction and the death sentence, holding the plea of guilty was not improvident, that the extra‑judicial confession was voluntary and corrobor...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the accused’s plea of guilty improvidently accepted by the trial court, warranting reversal or withdrawal of the plea?
- Was there sufficient admissible evidence, independent of the guilty plea, to support conviction beyond reasonable doubt?
- Does the accused’s asserted drug addiction negate criminal responsibility or otherwise preclude imposition of the death ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)