Case Summary (G.R. No. 218406)
Petitioner
Leonidas Epifanio y Lazaro pleaded not guilty at arraignment and testified in his own defense, offering an alibi and a narrative that he assisted the injured Crisaldo after the attack and was later detained but released.
Respondent
People of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) on appeal.
Key Dates
Relevant procedural and factual dates appearing in the record include: the incident (August 15, 1990); filing of the Information (January 4, 1991); arraignment (June 25, 1991); trial testimony dates; RTC decision (July 5, 1994); appellate disposition at the Court of Appeals and subsequent proceedings referenced in the record.
Applicable Law
The 1987 Constitution governs the case (decision date post-1990). Criminal statutes and rules applied include the Revised Penal Code provisions invoked in the Information (Article 248 as to murder/frustrated murder; Article 6), Article 51 (for attempted offenses), the Indeterminate Sentence Law for fixing minimum and maximum terms, and procedural rules including Rule 45 (Petition for Review on Certiorari).
Factual Background
On the evening of August 15, 1990, Crisaldo and his cousin Allan walked home along a narrow path. Crisaldo felt a piercing thrust in his back, turned, and saw petitioner. Petitioner stabbed Crisaldo again, hitting his left arm as Crisaldo defended himself. Allan, hearing Crisaldo’s outcry, rushed to his aid, called petitioner by name, and petitioner fled. Crisaldo was taken first-aid to a local hospital, then transferred to Davao Medical Center, where he recuperated for approximately three weeks.
Medical Evidence
An attending physician, Santiago Aquino, issued a medical certificate dated September 4, 1990, describing: a stab wound to the right scapular area (medial border) at the level of the 5th–7th intercostal spaces; a left arm medial aspect wound; fractures of the 7th and 8th ribs posteriorly on the right. The certificate estimated probable healing time of 15–30 days barring complication. No live testimony of the doctor regarding the mortal quality of the wounds was presented at trial.
Charges and Information
Petitioner was charged in the Information with Frustrated Murder, alleging treachery and evident premeditation, intent to kill, and that he performed “all the acts of execution which would produce the crime of murder” but that death did not occur due to timely medical assistance. The Information sought criminal penalties and damages for actual, moral, and compensatory harm.
Defense
Petitioner’s defense was principally denial with an alibi and an account that he had spent the day harvesting coconuts, returned home and slept, was awakened to help load the wounded Crisaldo into a jeep, and that he later was told he was a suspect and briefly detained. He asserted he did not commit the stabbing.
Trial Court Decision
The Regional Trial Court (Branch 4, Panabo, Davao) found petitioner guilty of Frustrated Murder and sentenced him to an indeterminate term of six years and one day to ten years of prision mayor, imposed accessory penalties, and ordered indemnity of P6,000.00 to the victim.
Court of Appeals Proceedings
Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the RTC decision in toto. A Motion for Reconsideration before the CA was denied, and petitioner elevated the matter by a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45.
Issue on Review
The sole issue presented in the petition was whether the guilt of the petitioner for the crime of Frustrated Murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Petitioner sought reclassification to the lesser offense of Attempted Murder, asserting absence of proof that the injuries were life-threatening and pointing to the medical certificate’s lack of an express finding that the wounds were mortal.
Prosecution’s Position on Appeal
The OSG argued that the failure to present the treating physician to testify on the wounds was not raised below but that appellate review could nonetheless consider such matters; that petitioner did not object to the admissibility of the medical certificate; that petitioner performed “all the acts of execution”; and that the victim’s three-week hospitalization is not determinative of whether injuries were fatal.
Reviewability and Scope of Appellate Examination
The Court recognized that an appeal in a criminal case opens the entire case for review, permitting correction of errors not assigned below. Hence the absence of doctor’s live testimony, while not objected to at trial, could be considered on appeal.
Legal Standard: Attempted vs. Frustrated Crime
The Court applied established distinctions: an attempted crime occurs when the offender is stopped prior to performing all acts which would produce the consummated crime (subjective phase not completed), whereas a frustrated crime exists when the offender has performed all acts of execution which should result in consummation, and failure to consummate is due to causes independent of the offender’s will. In homicide cases, a crucial consideration is whether the wound inflicted is mortal and would cause death absent medical intervention.
Proof of Intent to Kill
The Court found intent to kill established beyond reasonable doubt by Crisaldo’s consistent testimony describing the surprise attack from behind, the continuation of the assault when Crisaldo turned, and the treacherous manner of attack. The nature and manner of the assault supported a finding of specific intent.
Completion of Acts of Execution
Despite established intent, the Court concluded petitioner did not perform all acts of execution required for frustrated murder because Allan’s timely intervention caused petitioner to flee. Petitioner did not voluntarily desist; rather, external intervention prevented further assault. Therefore the subjective phase of the crime was not completed.
Importance of Medical Testimony on Fatality of Wounds
The Court emphasized that the prosecution failed to present testimonial evidence from the treating physician to demonstrate that the wounds were mortal in charact
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 218406)
Case Caption, Docket and Disposition Sought
- G.R. No. 157057; Third Division; Decision promulgated June 26, 2007.
- Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court, assailing:
- The Court of Appeals Decision dated May 22, 2002 in CA-G.R. CR No. 17995 affirming the Regional Trial Court Decision dated July 5, 1994 (RTC, Branch 4, Panabo, Davao) in Criminal Case No. 91-15 finding petitioner guilty of Frustrated Murder; and
- The Court of Appeals Resolution dated January 14, 2003 denying petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration.
- Petitioner’s expressed relief in the Supreme Court: not a request for full acquittal but a reduction of conviction from Frustrated Murder to the lesser offense of Attempted Murder.
Facts as Found by the RTC and the CA
- Date, time and place of incident:
- Around 9:00 p.m., August 15, 1990, in Kilometer 7, Del Monte, Samal, Davao.
- Parties at scene:
- Crisaldo Alberto (victim) and his cousin Allan Perez were walking home after visiting Crisaldo’s father; Allan walked about three meters ahead along a narrow pathway near shrubs called banganga.
- Attack description:
- Crisaldo felt a piercing thrust of a bladed weapon in his back, cried out, turned, and saw the attacker identified as petitioner (also known as "Iyo (Uncle) Kingkoy").
- Petitioner stabbed Crisaldo again, striking Crisaldo’s left arm as he tried to defend himself.
- Intervention and aftermath:
- Allan rushed to Crisaldo’s side, called petitioner by name—“Iyo Kingkoy (Uncle Kingkoy), why did you stab Saldo?”—which caused petitioner to run away.
- Allan brought Crisaldo to his father’s house where the wounds were wrapped in a blanket; Crisaldo was taken to the PeAaplata Hospital for first aid and then transferred to the Davao Medical Center, where he stayed about three weeks to recuperate.
- Medical findings:
- Attending physician Santiago Aquino issued a Medical Certificate dated September 4, 1990, noting: “Stab wound (R) scapular area (Medial border) at level 5-7 th ICS (L) arm Medial aspect M3rd Fracture 7 th and 8 th rib, posterior, right. Probable healing time will be 15-30 days barring complication.”
- Financial evidence of expenses:
- Receipts for expenses during hospitalization totaled P853.50 (Exhibits "C" to "C-12", Original Records, pp. 89-94).
Criminal Information, Arraignment and Plea
- Information (dated January 4, 1991) charged petitioner with Frustrated Murder alleging:
- The assault occurred on or about August 15, 1990 in Samal, Davao; petitioner acted with treachery and evident premeditation, with intent to kill, armed with a knife; he performed all acts of execution which would produce the crime of murder but the crime was not consummated due to causes independent of his will (timely and able medical assistance); allegations included the infliction of wounds that ordinarily would have caused death and prayed for damages.
- Arraignment:
- On June 25, 1991, petitioner, assisted by counsel, pleaded “not guilty.”
Petitioner’s Defense Account and Trial Testimony
- Petitioner’s narrative (testimony October 7, 1993):
- He claimed to have gone to Anonang at about 7:00 a.m. on August 15, 1990 to harvest coconuts, returned home at 4:30 p.m., slept at 8:00 p.m., and was awakened by his wife to assist Salvador Epifanio because someone had been hacked.
- He asserted that he went to the scene with Salvador, found Crisaldo wrapped in cloth, asked Crisaldo who stabbed him but received no answer, helped load Crisaldo into a jeep to the hospital, and later accompanied Crisaldo to Del Monte to report the incident to the barangay captain.
- The following day, he returned to Anonang to harvest coconuts; at about 1:00 p.m. he found policemen Barraga and Labrador at his house who said he was a suspect; he was detained but not investigated further and was ordered to go home.
- Core defense posture:
- Denial of being the assailant and an alibi / explanation of movements on the date in question.
Trial Court (RTC) Judgment
- RTC Decision dated July 5, 1994 (Criminal Case No. 91-15) convicted petitioner of Frustrated Murder.
- Dispositive sentence imposed by the RTC:
- Indeterminate imprisonment of Six (6) years and One (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to Ten (10) years of prision mayor as maximum, plus accessory penalties and costs.
- Ordered indemnity to Crisaldo Alberto in the amount of P6,000.00 by way of damages.
Court of Appeals Proceedings
- Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CR No. 17995).
- CA Decision dated May 22, 2002 affirmed the RTC Decision in toto.
- Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration before the CA; the motion was denied by CA Resolution dated January 14, 2003.
- CA panel for original appellate decision: penned by Associate Justice Eugenio S. Labitoria (retired) and concurred in by Associate Justices Teodoro P. Regino (retired) and Juan Q. Enriquez, Jr.
Issue Presented to the Supreme Court
- Sole question stated in the petition: WHETHER THE GUILT OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE CRIME OF FRUSTRATED MURDER WAS PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
- Petitioner’s specific contention:
- He sought reclassification of the conviction to attempted murder, arguing the evidence did not prove that the injuries were life-threatening or would have caused death absent timely medical intervention; the medical certificate only stated healing time (15-30 days) with no notation by the physician that any injury was life-threatening.
- Office of the Solicitor General’s (OSG) position:
- Contended that the prosecution’s failure to present the doctor to testify about the wounds was not raised at trial and is therefore barred on review and that petitioner did not object to the admissibility of the medical certificate when offered.
- Argued the crime is frustrated murder because petitioner performed “all the acts of execution,” and that Crisaldo’s three-week hospital stay is not determinative of fatality.
Supreme Court’s Preliminary Observations on Appealability and Review
- The Supreme Court recognized that the petition was in order and obs