Title
People vs. Balondo
Case
G.R. No. L-27401
Decision Date
Oct 31, 1969
Diego Balondo confessed to brutally murdering and mutilating his 16-year-old niece in 1966. Despite his guilty plea, the Supreme Court reduced his death sentence to reclusion perpetua, citing mitigating circumstances and insufficient votes for capital punishment.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-27401)

Filing of the Information and Allegations of Murder

The information alleged that, with deliberate intent to kill, the accused attacked, assaulted, and strangled Gloria Bulasa. It further described the manner of killing and the extensive injuries found on the victim, including indications of severe trauma to the face, neck, and body, as well as the loss of soft tissue and missing feet and digits. The information alleged the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation, and it also averred aggravating circumstances including abuse of superior strength, deliberate augmentation of the wrong by causing other wrong not necessary for the commission, the employment of means or circumstances that add ignominy to the natural effects of the act, disregard of sex, and relationship.

The information charged that the victim’s death was instantaneous as a consequence of the acts imputed to the accused.

Apprehension, Written Admissions, and Corroboration

After the discovery of the dead body, the accused was apprehended and, upon investigation by the Chief of Police of Kawayan, he readily admitted having killed Gloria Bulasa. His admission was initially reduced to writing in the Visayan dialect understood by him and signed by him. A subsequent, more lengthy investigation was conducted, during which he again admitted killing Gloria Bulasa and narrated in detail how he killed her and what he did with the body.

The record showed that the accused was taken to the place where the crime was committed, and he even reenacted what he did with the deceased. The statements he gave during the detailed examination, including the reenactment, were reduced to writing, subscribed and sworn to by him before the municipal judge of Kawayan.

The Court noted that these written admissions were corroborated in important details by Meliton Bulasa, the father of the victim, and Anatalio Bulasa, an uncle of the victim, both of whom signed sworn statements before the municipal judge.

A post mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Jose J. Tupaz, the municipal health officer of Kawayan. The medical findings on the body corresponded with the brutal acts described in the accused’s sworn statements.

Proceedings Before the Municipal Court and Arraignment Before the Trial Court

The criminal complaint was filed by the Chief of Police of Kawayan before the municipal court. During preliminary investigation, the accused pleaded guilty to murder when he was arraigned and narrated the circumstances attending the killing of Gloria Bulasa.

On October 24, 1966, the accused was arraigned before the Court of First Instance of Leyte. The trial court appointed Atty. Delia Tantuico as counsel de oficio. After consultation, counsel manifested readiness for arraignment. The trial court read the information to the accused in Waray-Waray, a dialect understood by him. After the reading, the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty to the murder charged.

Trial Court Decision and Its Findings

The Court of First Instance found the accused guilty of murder and sentenced him to suffer the extreme penalty of death. In its judgment, the trial court adopted and relied upon the substance of the accused’s admissions. The trial court quoted the accused’s narrative in detail, including that he saw Gloria Bulasa in the morning, followed her surreptitiously, confronted her about cutting banana leaves, and when he became furious he grabbed and strangled her, pinned her down, and smashed her face against mud until she died. The narrative further stated that after death the accused dragged and laid the body in a certain place, covered it with nipa leaves, and then sliced flesh from the legs, thighs, legs, shoulder, and other parts using a knife and a bolo described as dull. He then cooked the sliced pieces and ate them, describing the taste and stating that he killed Gloria Bulasa first to taste whether the human flesh was good.

The trial court further characterized the accused’s acts as going beyond even an extreme degree of brutality and framed the conduct as resembling cannibalism.

Counsel’s Request for Psychiatric Testing and the Court’s Rejection

On appeal, counsel de oficio, Atty. Justo R. Albert, argued that the trial court should have ordered a psychiatric test to determine the accused’s sanity before judgment. Counsel asked that the judgment be set aside and the case remanded with instruction for a psychiatric test.

The Court rejected this plea. It held that the record supplied sufficient justification to conclude that the accused was not insane at the time of the commission of the crime. The Court relied on the accused’s several sworn statements reduced to writing and duly signed, which the Court found consistent in important details. It also considered that the accused voluntarily admitted guilt before the municipal court during preliminary investigation and voluntarily pleaded guilty upon arraignment in the trial court. The Court added that the crime had occurred more than three years earlier; thus, it was not possible to ascertain the accused’s mental condition at the time of the charged acts with precision.

Qualification and Aggravating Circumstances: Abuse of Superior Strength and Other Factors

The Court agreed with the trial court that in killing Gloria Bulasa the accused took advantage of his superior strength, which qualifies the offense as murder under Article 248. The Court also agreed that the commission of the crime was attended by two aggravating circumstances: first, disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of her sex; and second, that the wrong done was deliberately augmented by causing another wrong not necessary for its commission.

The Court, however, corrected the trial court’s determination of two other aggravating circumstances. It held that the trial court erred in declaring as aggravating circumstances: (a) that means were employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act, and (b) that the victim’s relationship to the accused was aggravating.

Relationship and the Limits on Taking Relationship as an Aggravating Circumstance

On relationship, the Court invoked Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code, explaining that the alternative circumstance of relationship should be considered only when the offended party is the spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or a relative by affinity in the same degree of the offended. The Court found nothing in the record showing that this limitation was met. It thus refused to treat relationship as an aggravating circumstance on the facts as established.

Voluntary Plea of Guilt a

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.