Case Summary (G.R. No. 255740)
Applicable Law and Constitutional Basis
Constitutional framework: 1987 Philippine Constitution (applicable because the decision is dated 1990 or later). Statutory and procedural provisions applied: Revised Penal Code (RPC) Articles 263 (serious physical injuries), 266 (slight physical injuries), 89(5) (extinguishment of criminal liability by prescription), 90 (prescription of crimes), and 91 (computation of prescription). Rules of Court: Rule 120, Sections 4 and 5 (variance doctrine). Rules on Summary Procedure (governing light offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six months) and relevant jurisprudence: Francisco v. Court of Appeals; Panaguiton v. Department of Justice; Republic v. Desierto; Perez v. Sandiganbayan; People v. Pangilinan; Zaldivia v. Judge Reyes, Jr.
Factual Allegations
The private complainant alleged that on 25 November 2017, while proceeding to work, he was intercepted and assaulted by Pastor and two others, resulting in a bloody nose and alleged fracture of the proximal end of the fifth digit of the right hand. The medico-legal report indicated treatment/incapacity of three to nine days and noted a complete fracture of the finger’s proximal end. The prosecutor’s office, construing the fracture as disfigurement, filed an information charging Pastor and the co-accused with serious physical injuries (alleging a fractured right finger and disfigurement).
Procedural History
Pastor pleaded not guilty and trial ensued. The MeTC found insufficient evidence that the co-accused participated and acquitted them, but convicted Pastor of slight physical injuries (arresto menor; moral damages Php10,000) on 20 November 2018. The RTC dismissed Pastor’s appeal and affirmed the MeTC decision on 20 March 2019. The CA likewise denied Pastor’s appeal (Decision affirmed). Pastor filed a Petition for Review under Rule 45 with the Supreme Court contesting prescription and other matters; the Supreme Court granted the petition on the ground of prescription and acquitted Pastor.
Issues Presented
(1) Whether factual issues raised are beyond the scope of a Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari; (2) Whether the CA correctly ruled that the information charging serious physical injuries had not prescribed; (3) Whether the CA correctly affirmed conviction for slight physical injuries.
Legal Principle on Variance and Prescription
The variance doctrine (Rule 120, Secs. 4–5) permits conviction for an offense proved that is necessarily included in the offense charged. However, longstanding precedent (Francisco v. Court of Appeals) establishes that an accused cannot be convicted of a lesser included offense that had already prescribed at the time the information was filed. Allowing conviction of the lesser offense despite prescription would permit circumvention of prescription periods by charging the graver offense.
Classification of Offenses and Prescription Periods
Serious physical injuries under Article 263(3) (involving deformity or loss/use of a body part, or incapacity for habitual work for over 90 days) is a correctional offense (prision correccional) and prescribes in ten years. Slight physical injuries under Article 266 is a light offense; Article 90 prescribes light offenses in two months. Article 89(5) provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by prescription.
Computation Rule and Effect of Summary Procedure
Article 91 provides that the prescriptive period commences upon discovery of the crime by the offended party or authorities and is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information; it restarts if proceedings terminate without conviction or are unjustifiably stopped for reasons not imputable to the accused. The Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence (Republic v. Desierto) clarifies that for crimes within the scope of the Rules on Summary Procedure and within Metropolitan Manila/chartered cities, the running of prescription is tolled only by the filing of an information in the proper court, not by the lodging of a complaint with the prosecutor’s office. Slight physical injuries is governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure because it is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six months (arresto menor), so the information’s filing in court is the operative interruptive act.
Application to the Present Case
The evidence at trial established only slight physical injuries (incapacity/medical attendance of three to nine days), not the elements of serious physical injuries traced to the accused. Because slight physical injuries is a light offense prescribing in two months and the information was filed in court on 21 May 2018 while the incident occurred on 25 November 2017, 177 days had
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 255740)
Procedural History
- Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court filed with the Supreme Court challenging the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 43154.
- Criminal action originated from a Complaint-Affidavit executed by private complainant Roberto Amado Hatamosa (Roberto) against Pastor B. Corpus, Jr. (Pastor), Resurecion Zamora (Resurecion), and Felix Corpus (Felix).
- Senior Assistant City Prosecutor issued a Resolution (dated April 30, 2018) recommending indictment for serious physical injuries based on the medico-legal report indicating a complete fracture at the proximal end of the fifth digit of the right hand.
- Information for serious physical injuries was filed (accusatory portion dated April 30, 2018; the Information against Pastor was filed on May 21, 2018 per records).
- Pastor pleaded not guilty upon arraignment; pre-trial and trial on the merits were conducted.
- Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Branch 88, Parañaque City rendered a Decision on November 20, 2018 finding Pastor guilty of slight physical injuries and sentencing him to arresto menor (30 days) and ordering payment of Ten Thousand Pesos (Php10,000.00) as moral damages; co-accused Resurecion and Felix were acquitted for failure of the prosecution to present evidence against them.
- Pastor appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 257, Parañaque City; RTC affirmed the MeTC Decision in its March 20, 2019 Decision.
- Pastor appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA); CA denied the appeal and affirmed the RTC Decision (Decision penned March 13, 2020; Motion for Reconsideration denied in CA Resolution dated February 10, 2021).
- Supreme Court granted the Rule 45 petition and rendered judgment on August 16, 2023, reversing the CA Decision and acquitting Pastor on the ground of prescription; directed immediate entry of final judgment.
Factual Background
- On November 25, 2017, at around 10:45 a.m., Roberto alleged he was on his way to work at a barber shop when Pastor, Resurecion, and Felix intercepted him and shouted an insult; an exchange of words ensued and Pastor allegedly punched Roberto in the face.
- Prosecution witnesses consistently testified that Pastor punched Roberto in the face, causing a bloody nose and injuries that required not less than three but more than nine days to heal.
- The medico-legal report indicated a period of treatment or incapacity of three to nine days and noted a "complete fracture at the proximal end of the fifth (5th) digit of the right hand."
- MeTC found no evidence of participation by Resurecion and Felix in the mauling and found no evidence pointing to any accused as the cause of the fracture to Roberto’s finger.
- Records reflect the incident date (November 25, 2017), Roberto’s execution of his Complaint-Affidavit before the prosecutor’s office (recorded as January 8, 2018), and filing of the Information in court against Pastor (May 21, 2018).
Charges and Legal Characterization of the Offenses
- Information filed charged Pastor, Resurecion, and Felix with the crime of Serious Physical Injuries for allegedly mauling Roberto, which caused a fractured right finger and a disfigurement to the complainant (allegation invoking Article 263(3) of the Revised Penal Code).
- At trial, the offense actually proven was the lesser offense of Slight Physical Injuries under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code, based on injuries producing incapacity for labor of more than one but less than ten days and requiring medical attendance.
Issues Presented to the Supreme Court
- Whether the factual issues raised by Pastor are beyond the ambit of a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
- Whether the Court of Appeals correctly ruled that the Information charging Pastor for serious physical injuries had not prescribed.
- Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed Pastor’s conviction for the crime of slight physical injuries.
Governing Legal Provisions and Doctrines Cited
- Rule 120, Sections 4 and 5, Rules of Court (variance doctrine; judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof; when an offense includes or is included in another).
- Article 263, Revised Penal Code — Serious Physical Injuries (including Article 263(3) concerning deformity, loss of part or use thereof, or incapacity for habitual work for more than ninety days).
- Article 266, Revised Penal Code — Slight Physical Injuries and Maltreatment (penalties and criteria: incapacity for labor from one to nine days, medical attendance, etc.).
- Article 25, Revised Penal Code — classification of penalties including correctional penalties (prisión correccional).
- Article 90, Revised Penal Code — Prescription of crimes (light offenses prescrib