Title
Supreme Court
People vs. ZZZ
Case
G.R. No. 228828
Decision Date
Jul 24, 2019
ZZZ, a minor, convicted of rape with homicide based on circumstantial evidence, including witness testimony, medical findings, and flight. Court ruled he acted with discernment, sentencing him to 10-17 years and ordering damages to AAA’s family.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 119172)

Petitioner

People of the Philippines

Respondent

ZZZ

Key Dates

• May 16, 1996 – Incident occurred
• February 6, 2003 – Arrest of ZZZ
• March 4, 2013 – RTC conviction
• February 29, 2016 – CA affirmed
• July 24, 2019 – SC decision

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
• Revised Penal Code Arts. 266-A (rape), 266-B (penalties), 63 (indivisible penalties), 68(2) (minority)
• Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act)
• Rules on Evidence, Rule 133 § 4 (circumstantial evidence)

Factual Background

On the evening of May 16, 1996, BBB saw ZZZ dragging AAA by the wrist toward a schoolyard. The next day AAA was reported missing. A few days later, barangay officials found her decomposed, naked body in a bamboo grove, with a cracked temporal skull and a half-inch laceration below the left labia. ZZZ left town, assumed an alias in Tarlac, and was arrested in 2003.

Trial Court Proceedings

ZZZ was charged with rape with homicide. Prosecution presented BBB’s identification, police testimony recounting his flight and brother YYY’s initial statement, and autopsy findings by Drs. Mejia and Bandonill confirming cranial trauma and genital injury. Defense offered ZZZ’s alibi—he watched television at his grandmother’s with YYY and AAA—and YYY’s recanted alibi. The RTC found circumstantial evidence unbroken, convicted ZZZ beyond reasonable doubt, suspended the sentence under RA 9344, and awarded damages.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The CA upheld conviction: (1) BBB’s testimony was credible and spontaneous; (2) circumstantial evidence—last seen with victim, flight, alias—met Rule 133 requirements; (3) ZZZ acted with discernment under RA 9344, hence not exempt; (4) suspension of sentence inapplicable due to age at conviction; and (5) damages affirmed.

Issues on Appeal

  1. Whether guilt for rape with homicide was proven beyond reasonable doubt
  2. Whether ZZZ acted with discernment, negating exemption under RA 9344

Supreme Court’s Analysis – Circumstantial Evidence

The SC applied Rule 133 § 4: multiple proven facts—BBB’s sighting, YYY’s statements, flight and alias, autopsy findings—produced moral certainty of guilt. Direct evidence being absent in rape cases, the unbroken chain of inferences sufficed for conviction.

Witness Credibility and Alibi

The SC deferred to the RTC’s credibility findings. BBB had no motive to falsely implicate. YYY’s retraction and inconsistency undermined the alibi. ZZZ’s challenge that suspicion alone was insufficient failed; he did not establish physical impossibility of presence at the crime scene.

Discernment under RA 9344

RA 9344 exempts children 15–18 absent discernment. The SC found ZZZ displayed discernment by committing the crime in isolation, evading arrest, and understanding consequences (as confirmed by a social worker). Thus he was subject to criminal proceedings.

Penalties and Damages

Under R




...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.