Case Digest (G.R. No. 137280)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 137280)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Pablo Tablon y Ceniza, G.R. No. 137280, March 13, 2002, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam. The prosecution (plaintiff-appellee) charged Pablo Tablon y Ceniza (accused-appellant) with the complex crime of rape with homicide under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by R.A. 7659.On 16 August 1996 a badly decomposed female body was discovered near the Ormoc District Hospital; autopsy by Dr. Rogelio Marson placed death at about two weeks earlier and found a one-centimeter stab wound to the right chest and physical indicia consistent with sexual assault (panties and pants at the ankle joints, thighs drawn lateralward). The victim was identified through clothing as Angelina Abapo, who had gone missing on 6 August 1996. Investigation led to appellant; on 22 August 1996 he executed an extrajudicial statement admitting that, while drunk and driven by lust, he stabbed Angelina, raped her after she fell, and left the scene.
At trial appellant recanted parts of that confession. He admitted killing Angelina but claimed self-defense, testifying that an unknown intruder had entered and attacked him and that he stabbed the assailant—later identified as Angelina—only to repel aggression. He also alleged that his earlier extrajudicial confession had been compelled by police coercion. The prosecution presented Dr. Marson’s autopsy testimony corroborating sexual assault indicators and evidence that the stab wound was not instantly fatal, supporting that intercourse occurred while the victim was still alive. Appellant’s counsel from the Public Attorney’s Office who was present during custodial questioning testified that he informed appellant of his rights and that the confession appeared voluntary.
The Regional Trial Court, Branch 35, Ormoc City, convicted appellant beyond reasonable doubt of rape with homicide and imposed the death penalty, ordered civil indemnity and moral damages, and the case was taken up to this Court by automatic review (required when the death penalty is imposed). Appellant raised three assignments of error: (1) that the killing was justified by self-defense (Article 11, RPC); (2) that evidence was insufficient to prove rape as an element of the complex crime; and (3) that the court erred in admitting and relying on his extrajudicial confession as voluntary.
Issues:
- Was appellant’s claim of self-defense sufficient to absolve him of criminal liability under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code?
- Was there sufficient evidence to prove that rape occurred and thus sustain conviction for the complex crime of rape with homicide under Article 335 as amended by R.A. 7659?
- Was appellant’s extrajudicial confession admissible as voluntary and properly considered by the trial court?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)