THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 235779. March 6, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.NONITO IMBO y GAMORES, accused-appellant.
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated March 6, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 235779 (People of the Philippines vs. Nonito Imbo y Gamores). — Accused-appellant Nonito Imbo y Gamores (accused-appellant) was indicted for the crime of qualified rape committed against AAA 1 in Criminal Case No. Q-07-147109 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 223. The Information alleged that AAA "is deprived of reason or demented and accused knew of her mental disability at the time of the commission of the crime." 2
After trial on the merits, the RTC, in its Decision 3 dated August 26, 2015, convicted accused-appellant of the crime charged and sentenced him as follows:
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, the accused Nonito Imbo y Gamores is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Qualified Rape and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He is also ordered to pay Ms. AAA the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as civil indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as moral damages, and Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as exemplary damages. 4
On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the findings of the RTC, but modified the penalty that it imposed. The dispositive portion of the Decision 5 dated July 28, 2017 of the appellate court in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07944 reads:
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The assailed RTC Decision, dated August 26, 2015, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS in that the award of civil indemnity is increased from Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000.00) to One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00), the award of moral damages is increased from Fifty Thousand Pesos (PhP50,000.00) to One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00), and the award of exemplary damages is increased from Thirty Thousand Pesos (PhP30,000.00) to One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00), with legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of the finality of this decision until fully paid. Costs against the Accused-Appellant. 6
Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal 7 on August 14, 2017, which the Court of Appeals granted in its Resolution 8 dated September 19, 2017. ETHIDa
Both accused-appellant and plaintiff-appellee manifested 9 before this Court that they were no longer submitting Supplemental Briefs, as their respective Briefs earlier filed before the Court of Appeals already sufficed as extensive and exhaustive discussions of their arguments.
However, the Bureau of Corrections, via a letter 10 dated September 24, 2018, informed this Court that accused-appellant died on April 9, 2017 and attached thereto the Report of Death 11 issued by Dr. Jigger B. Sadsad, Medical Officer III of the National Bilibid Prison Hospital, Muntinlupa City, confirming accused-appellant's demise. In another letter 12 dated December 21, 2018, the Bureau of Corrections provided the Court with a certified true copy of accused-appellant's Certificate of Death, 13 which stated that he was "D.O.A." or dead on arrival on April 9, 2017, with the note "For Autopsy."
The foregoing circumstances warrant the dismissal of the case at hand.
Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code states that the death of the accused before final judgment extinguishes his criminal liability, 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 therefore is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment[.]
Pursuant to the above-mentioned provision, the Court, in People v. Bayotas, 14 laid down the following guidelines with respect to the criminal and civil liabilities of the accused in case of death:
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
3. 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.
4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private-offended party instituted together therewith the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case, conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a possible privation of right by prescription.
Accused-appellant's case was still pending before the Court when he died on April 9, 2017. Thus, by reason of his death before the rendition of judgment, accused-appellant's criminal and civil liabilities arising from the crime committed are deemed extinguished. The criminal case against accused-appellant must be dismissed.
WHEREFORE, in view of the death of accused-appellant Nonito Imbo y Gamores on April 9, 2017, Criminal Case No. Q-07-147109 before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 223 of Quezon City, is hereby DISMISSED. cSEDTC
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. The identity of the victim or any information to establish or compromise his/her identity as well as those of his/her immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes"; Republic Act No. 9262, "An Act Defining Violence against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes"; Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known as the "Rule on Violence against Women and Their Children," effective November 5, 2004; and People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703 (2006).
2. CA rollo, p. 65.
3.Id. at 65-76; penned by Presiding Judge Caridad M. Walse-Lutero.
4.Id. at 76.
5.Rollo, pp. 2-18; penned by Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro with Associate Justices Danton Q. Bueser and Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob concurring.
6.Id. at 16-17.
7.Id. at 19-21.
8.Id. at 22.
9. Per Manifestation and Motion dated May 15, 2018 filed by the Office of the Solicitor General on behalf of plaintiff-appellee People of the Philippines (Rollo, pp. 26-29), and Manifestation (In Lieu of a Supplemental Brief) dated June 27, 2018 filed by accused-appellant (Rollo, pp. 30-34).
10.Rollo, p. 37.
11.Id. at 38.
12. Temporary rollo.
13.Id.
14. 306 Phil. 266, 282-284 (1994).