G.R. No. 197645 - Adlawan vs. People

Case Summary (G.R. No. 197645)

Factual Background

On 18 February 2004, Georgia R. Adlawan, the stepmother of Carlos Jay Adlawan, sustained multiple deep lacerations and contusions after an incident at the family residence in Brgy. Lipata, Minglanilla, Cebu. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner chased and hacked Georgia with a long-bladed weapon, identified in testimony as a katana, inflicting wounds on the neck, head, abdomen, shoulders, and other parts of the body. Georgia sought immediate medical attention and was transferred to Perpetual Succour Hospital, where Dr. Rogelio Kangleon issued a medical certificate describing multiple severe wounds and opining that one wound in the left neck area would have been fatal but for timely medical intervention.

Charges and Arraignment

On 5 March 2004, two Informations charged the petitioner with Frustrated Murder and Attempted Robbery. On 25 March 2004, the petitioner, with counsel, pleaded not guilty and trial on the merits ensued before the Regional Trial Court.

Evidence for the Prosecution

The prosecution presented Georgia’s in-court identification of the petitioner as her assailant and the testimony of Fred John Dahay, an eyewitness who testified that he saw the petitioner chase and hack Georgia. The prosecution also offered a medical certificate, photographs of the wounds, and testimony of police officers who investigated the incident. One investigating officer admitted on cross-examination that certain weapons allegedly seized from the petitioner’s room were taken without a search warrant and without the petitioner’s consent. Dr. Kangleon testified that the wounds were consistent with hack wounds and that Georgia could have died absent prompt medical care.

Defense Version and Testimony

The defense did not present the petitioner as a witness. It called Cornelio Selin, the family houseboy, who testified that Georgia ran, slipped, and fell while attempting to board a multicab after an altercation with the petitioner, and that she sustained the injuries in that fall. Cornelio denied seeing the petitioner hack Georgia or holding a weapon.

Trial Court Judgment

The RTC rendered a joint judgment dated 17 August 2006. The court acquitted the petitioner of attempted robbery in Criminal Case No. CBU-68829 for lack of proof of overt acts constituting robbery. The RTC convicted him of frustrated homicide in Criminal Case No. CBU-68828, finding that the petitioner repeatedly hacked Georgia and inflicted mortal wounds. The RTC concluded that the acts performed were all acts of execution necessary to consummate homicide but that Georgia’s life was saved by medical treatment, rendering the crime frustrated. The RTC applied the Indeterminate Sentence Law, found aggravating circumstances of abuse of superior strength and insult or disregard of respect due to the victim’s age, sex, and status as stepmother, and sentenced the petitioner to imprisonment from six years of prision correccional to twelve years of prision mayor, and ordered indemnity for moral damages and medical expenses.

Court of Appeals Decision

On appeal, the Court of Appeals issued a decision on 15 September 2010 that affirmed the RTC’s conviction for frustrated homicide but modified the penalty. The CA agreed that the prosecution proved intent to kill by the means used and the nature and location of the wounds, but it held that the trial court erred in appreciating aggravating circumstances that were not alleged in the Information. Consequently, the CA reduced the maximum term and sentenced the petitioner to imprisonment from six years of prision correccional to ten years of prision mayor. The CA also denied a subsequent Motion for Reconsideration and a Joint Motion to Dismiss and to Admit Private Complainant’s Affidavit of Recantation and Desistance in a Resolution dated 15 June 2011.

Affidavit of Recantation and Joint Motion to Dismiss

After the CA decision, the private complainant, Georgia R. Adlawan, executed an Affidavit of Recantation and Desistance dated 10 December 2010, in which she alleged that she fabricated the accusations and described an alternate account where her injuries resulted from smashing into a glass door and slipping while boarding the multicab. The petitioner filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss and to Admit the affidavit, with Georgia’s conformity. The CA denied the motion, holding that an affidavit of desistance alone does not warrant dismissal and that the motion reiterated arguments already passed upon.

Issues Raised in the Petition

In the petition for review under Rule 45, Rules of Court, the petitioner raised two principal issues: first, that there was grave failure of appellate review by the Court of Appeals rendering its decision void; and second, that the CA gravely erred in disregarding the private complainant’s affidavit of recantation and desistance and in declaring that the affidavit is not a ground for dismissal once an action has been instituted in court.

Petitioner’s Contentions

The petitioner argued that the CA failed to conduct an honest appellate review because it did not thoroughly consider alleged defects in prosecution proof, including lack of intent to kill, inadmissible presentation of the weapon, insufficiency of injuries to cause death, and inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony demonstrating fabrication. He further argued that the Affidavit of Recantation and Desistance corroborated the fabrication and should have led to dismissal.

The Court’s Reviewability Analysis

The Supreme Court held that the petition lacked merit on threshold grounds of reviewability. The Court reiterated that a petition under Rule 45 shall raise only questions of law. The Court explained the distinction between questions of law and questions of fact and concluded that the petitioner’s first assignment of error primarily raised factual questions involving credibility, probative value of evidence, and re-assessment of medical and testimonial evidence. The Court therefore declined to reweigh credibility findings made by the trial and appellate courts absent exceptional circumstances, which the petitioner did not establish.

The Court’s Merits Analysis

Assuming arguendo that exceptional circumstances existed, the Court examined the merits and found that the CA did not fail in its appellate review. The Court agreed that intent to kill was adequately inferred from the means used and the nature, number, and location of the wounds. The Court also acknowledged that the weapon offered in evidence was inadmissible because of unlawful seizure, but held that non-presentation of the weapon did not vitiate the prosecution’s case where the accused was positively identified and the medical and photographic evidence supported the nature of the injuries. The Court further treated alleged minor inconsistencies in Georgia’s testimony as immaterial to her credibility because they did not affect material aspects of her identification and account.

The Court’s Ruling on the Affidavit of Recantation

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA’s refusal to dismiss on the basis of Georgia’s post-conviction Affidavit of Recantation and Desistance. The Court stated

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 197645)

Parties and Procedural Posture

Carlos Jay Adlawan was the accused and petitioner who appealed his conviction for frustrated homicide to the Court of Appeals and thereafter to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45.
People of the Philippines was the respondent and the prosecuting party at trial.
The trial court rendered a Joint Judgment on 17 August 2006 convicting petitioner in Criminal Case No. CBU-68828 and acquitting him in Criminal Case No. CBU-68829.
The Court of Appeals issued a Decision on 15 September 2010 affirming with modification the RTC judgment and later denied reconsideration and a Joint Motion to Dismiss by Resolution dated 15 June 2011.
The petitioner filed the present petition to challenge the CA’s 15 September 2010 Decision and 15 June 2011 Resolution.

Key Factual Allegations

The victim and private complainant, Georgia R. Adlawan, was the second wife of the late Alfonso V. Adlawan and the petitioner’s stepmother.
The parties lived together in Minglanilla, Cebu, and on 18 February 2004 Georgia instructed her secretary to withdraw PHP 100,000 for Alfonso’s hospital bills.
The petitioner confronted Georgia in the backyard that afternoon, allegedly demanded "where is the money," and subsequently hacked her with a long-bladed weapon described as a katana.
Georgia fled to the garage while the petitioner pursued and continued to hack her until she fell, and she thereafter sought immediate medical attention at a nearby hospital.
An eyewitness, Fred John Dahay, testified to having seen the petitioner chase and hack Georgia.
Cornelio, the household cook, testified for the defense that Georgia slipped and fell and that the petitioner did not wield a weapon.

Injuries and Medical Evidence

The medical certificate prepared by Dr. Rogelio Kangleon documented multiple long lacerations and contusions including a 15 cm penetrating laceration on the left lateral neck and other large gashes on the scalp, back, abdomen, and limbs.
Dr. Kangleon testified that the wounds were consistent with hack wounds and that the neck wound would have been fatal absent timely medical intervention.
Photographs of the injuries, admitted as Exhibits "B" to "G", depicted long straight gashes consistent with a long-bladed weapon.

Prosecution and Defense Evidence

The prosecution relied on the testimony of Georgia, eyewitness Fred John Dahay, secretary Maria Reina, police investigators, the medical certificate, and photographic exhibits.
Police testimony included an admission by Police Senior Inspector Germano Mallari that the weapon allegedly seized from petitioner’s room was obtained without a search warrant and without the petitioner’s consent.
The defense presented only Cornelio as a witness and did not put the petitioner on the stand.

Trial Court Ruling

The Regional Trial Court acquitted the petitioner of attempted robbery in Criminal Case No. CBU-68829 for lack of overt acts constituting attempted robbery.
The RTC convicted the