THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 252143. June 16, 2021.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GINHAWA DIWA y GUTIEREZ * alias "BONG", accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated June 16, 2021, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 252143 (People of the Philippines v. Ginhawa Diwa y Gutierez alias "Bong"). — This is an Appeal 1 from the Decision 2 dated November 13, 2019 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 12254, which affirmed with modification the Decision dated September 18, 2018 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City, Branch 120 in Criminal Case No. C-93947 (2015) and Criminal Case No. C-93948 (2015), convicting Ginhawa Diwa y Gutierez alias "Bong" (accused-appellant) for violation of Section 5 (Sale of Dangerous Drugs) and Section 11 (Possession of Dangerous Drugs), Article II of Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
In a Resolution 3 dated August 24, 2020, the Court required the parties to submit their respective supplemental briefs.
However, in a Letter 4 dated October 17, 2020, CSInsp. Jeremy L. Argonza (CSInsp. Argonza), OIC-Superintendent, New Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City, informed the Court that accused-appellant had died on January [2], 2020. Accordingly, the Court issued a Resolution 5 dated January 13, 2021 ordering the submission of a certified true copy of accused-appellant's death certificate. In a Letter dated March 9, 2021, CSInsp. Argonza complied with the Court's directive, attaching a certified true copy of accused-appellant's Certificate of Death, 6 which indicated that accused-appellant died on January 2, 2020.
Owing to the death of accused-appellant during the pendency of this appeal, the Court resolves to dismiss the criminal cases against him.
Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, accused-appellant's death prior to his final conviction renders dismissible the criminal case against him. 7 Article 89 (1) of the Revised Penal Code provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the accused, to wit:
Article 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment[.]
In People v. Egagamao, 8 the Court explained the effects of the death of an accused pending appeal or finality of his conviction on his liabilities, as follows:
1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability[,] as well as the civil liability[,] based solely thereon. As opined by Justice Regalado, in this regard, "the death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his criminal liability and only the civil liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex delicto in senso strictiore."
2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict. Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these other sources of obligation from which the civil liability may arise as a result of the same act or omission:
a) Law
b) Contracts
c) Quasi-contracts
d) x x x
e) Quasi-delicts
Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. This separate civil action may be enforced either against the executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as explained above. 9
Considering accused's death pending appeal extinguishes his criminal liability and civil liability ex delicto, the criminal action must be dismissed, as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused. 10 CAIHTE
Here, when accused-appellant died on January 2, 2020 during the pendency of his appeal or prior to the finality of his conviction, his criminal liability had already been extinguished. From that point on, the criminal action had no defendant upon which the action is based. The criminal action must be dismissed.
WHEREFORE, the Court resolves to DISMISS Criminal Case No. C-93947 (2015) and Criminal Case No. C-93948 (2015) before the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City, Branch 120, on account of the death of accused-appellant Ginhawa Diwa y Gutierez alias "Bong" on January 2, 2020. The case is hereby declared CLOSED and TERMINATED.
SO ORDERED."(Hernando. J., on official leave.)
By authority of the Court:
MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDivision Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) RUMAR D. PASIONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
* Also spelled as "Gutierrez" in some parts of the rollo.
1.Rollo, pp. 26-27.
2.Id. at 3-25; penned by Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr., with Associate Justices Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela and Louis P. Acosta, concurring.
3.Id. at 31-32.
4.Id. at 33-34.
5.Id. at 44-45.
6.Id. at 50-51.
7.People v. Culas, 810 Phil. 205, 207-208 (2017).
8. 792 Phil. 500 (2016).
9.Id. at 507-508.
10.People v. Paras, 746 Phil. 167, 171 (2014).