A.
Medico-legal classification of wounds
1. People vs. Camano
PEOPLE vs. FILOMENO CAMANO
G.R. No. L36662-63 July 30, 1982
CONCEPCION JR., J.:
FACTS:
Three years prior to this incident, the two victims had a misunderstanding
with the accused while fishing along Sagnay River. During this occasion it
appears that the accused requested Godofredo Pascua to tow his fishing
boat with the motor boat owned by Mariano Buenaflor but the request was
refused by both. This refusal greatly offended and embittered the accused
against the victims. From this time on, the accused begrudged the two, and
entertained personal resentment against them. And although on several
occasions, the accused was seen at the game table with Godofredo Pascual
drinking liquor, the friendly attitude towards Pascua, seems to be merely
artificial than real, more so, with respect to Mariano Buenaflor whom he
openly detested. He consistently refused to associate since then with the two
victim especially, Mariano Buenaflor. In fact, no less than ten attempts were
made by Amado Payago, a neighbor, inviting the accused for reconciliation
with the victims but were refused. Instead, defendant when intoxicated or
drunk, used to challenge Mariano Buenaflor to a fight and announce his evil
intention to kill them.
Between the hours of four and five o'clock in the afternoon, after the accused
had been drinking liquor, he stabbed twice the victim Godofredo Pascua with
a bolo, called in the vernacular Bicol "palas" which is a sharp bladed and
pointed instrument about two feet long including the black handle, tapering to
the end, about one and one-half inches in width, while the latter was walking
alone along the barrio street almost in front of the store of one Socorro
Buates. The victim, Godofredo Pascua, sustained two mortal wounds for
which he died instantaneously, described by Dr. Constancio A. Tan,
Municipal Health Officer in his Autopsy Report as follows:
NATURE OF WOUNDS UPON AUTOPSY:
1. WOUND STAB three (3) inches long at left side, three (3) inches below left
axilla, a little bit posteriorly, cutting the skin, subcutaneous tissues, muscles
one (1) rib, pleura of left lung, pericardium, penetrating the ventricles of the
heart, Media stinum, the right lung and exit to the right chest. One inch
opening.
2. WOUND INCISED, one inch long at the left arm
CAUSE OF DEATH Wound No.1 causing instant death due to severe
hemorrhage.
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
After hacking and stabbing to death Godofredo Pascua, the accused
proceeded to the seashore of the barrio, and on finding Mariano Buenaflor
leaning at the gate of the fence of his house, in a kneeling position, with both
arms on top of the fence, and his head stooping down hacked the latter with
the same bolo, first on the head, and after the victim fell and rolled to the
ground, after said blow, he continued hacking him, until he lay prostrate on
the ground, face up, when the accused gave him a final thrust of the bolo at
the left side of the chest above the nipple running and penetrating to the right
side a little posteriorly and superiorly with an exit at the back, of one (1) inch
opening, causing instant death. The victim, Mariano Buenaflor sustained
eight wounds, which were specifically described by Dr. Tan in his Autopsy
Report as follows:
NATURE OF WOUNDS UPON AUTOPSY:
1. WOUND STAB, Two (2) inches long at the left side of chest above the
nipple, running to the right side a little posteriorly and superiorly with an exit
at the back of one (1) inch opening. Penetrating the skin, subcutaneous
tissues, pericardium the auricles of the heart, the left lung towards the right
side of back.
2. WOUND STAB at sternum one and one-half (1 1/2) inches deep three
fourth (3/4) inch long penetrating the skin and the sternum.
3. WOUND STAB left side of neck three fourth (3/4) inch long one and one
half (1 1/2) inches deep.
4. WOUND HACKED, cutting left ear and bone four (4) inches long.
5. WOUND HACKED, left leg three (3) inches long cutting skin and bone of
anterior side.
6. WOUND INCISED left palm two (2) inches long.
7. WOUND STAB, one (1) inch long two (2) inches deep at the back near
spinal column.
8. WOUND HACKED, two (2) inches long at dome of head cutting skin and
bone.
CAUSE OF DEATH — Wound number one (1) causing instant death due
to severe hemorrhage from the heart." Out of the eight (8) wounds, two
(2) are mortal wounds, namely wound Number one (1) and wound
Number Three (3)
The bloody incident was not preceded or precipitated by any altercation
between the victims and the accused. After killing the two victims, he
returned to his house, where he subsequently surrendered to Policemen
Adolfo
Avila, Juan Chavez, Erasmo Valencia, upon demand by laid peace officers
for him to surrender. When brought to the Police headquarters of the town for
investigation he revealed that the bolo he used in the killing was hidden by
him under the table of his house. Following this tip, Patrolman Jose Baluyot
was dispatched, and recovered the weapon at the place indicated, which
when presented to he Chief of Police was still stained with human blood from
1
the base of the handle to the point of the blade. And when asked as to who
was he owner of said bolo, the accused admitted it as his. He also admitted
the killing of Godofredo Pascua and Mariano Buenaflor. however, when he
was asked to sign a statement, he refused.
The accused claims that a group of eight (8) men headed by Godofredo
Pascua and Mariano Buenaflor ganged up on him by boxing him one after
another while others were throwing stones at him; that he was attacked by
Godofredo Pascua with a bolo which he succeeded in wresting from him; that
he did not know Godofredo Pascua was killed; and that he killed said
Mariano Buenaflor after a bolo duel.
CHARGE: 2 counts of murder attended by evident premeditation and
treachery
RTC: Guilty
SC: Guilty
ISSUE: Is treachery present in the commission of the crime?
HELD: Yes. Treachery is present in the commission of the crime.
Payago categorically declared that Filomeno Camano attacked Godofredo
Pascua from behind, a method which has ensured the accomplishment of the
criminal act without any risk to the perpetrator arising from the defense that
his victim may put up. His testimony is corroborated by the nature and
location of the wounds sustained by the deceased Godofredo Pascua. The
autopsy report showed that the point of entry of the stab wound inflicted upon
Pascua was
- three (3) inches long and three (3) inches below the left armpit, a
little bit posteriorly or toward the hinder end of the body; and
- the point of exit was the right chest, one (1) inch Iateral to the
right nipple with a one (1) inch opening.
If the deceased was stabbed while he was facing his assailant, as claimed by
counsel for the accused, the entrance wound would have been in the front
part of the body, and its exit wound, if any, would be at the back. The trial
court, therefore, did not commit an error in finding that the deceased
Godofredo Pascua was assaulted from behind.
With respect to Mariano Buenaflor, the evidence shows that he was attacked
while in a kneeling position, with his arms on top of the gate of the fence
surrounding his hut and his head was "stooping down." He was hacked on
the head, causing him to fall to the ground, and then successively hacked
and stabbed without respite, as he lay on the ground, until he died. The
attack was also sudden, unexpected, and lethal, such as to disable and
incapacitate the victim from putting up any defense.
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Hence, Treachery is present in the commission of the crime.
2. People vs. Domantay
People v. Domantay
GR No. 130612, May 11, 1999
Mendoza, J.
Accused: Bernardino Domantay
Victim: Jennifer Domantay
FACTS:
The body of six-year old Jennifer Domantay was found sprawled amidst a
bamboo grove in Guilig, Malasiqui, Pangasinan. Her body bore several stab
wounds. The medical examination conducted by Dr. Macaranas, the rural
health physician showed that Jennifer died of multiple organ failure and
hypovolemic shock secondary to 38 stab wounds at the back. No lacerations
or signs of inflammation of the outer and inner labia and the vaginal walls of
the victims genitalia. Noting possible commission of acts of lasciviousness.
The investigation pointed to Bernardino Domantay, a cousin of the victim’s
grandfather, as the lone suspect. At the time that he picked up, he confessed
to killing Jennifer and disclosed that he had given the fatal weapon, a
bayonet, to the spouses Casingal, his aunt and uncle. The weapon was
recovered
A criminal complaint for murder against Domantay was filed before the MTC.
Dr. Bandonill, medico-legal expert of the NBI, performed an autopsy on the
embalmed body of Jennifer. He found out that the hymen has been
completely lacerated on the right side. Thus, the complaint was amended to
rape with homicide.
Dr. Bandonill, the NBI medico-legal who conducted an autopsy of the victim
testified that Jennifer died as a result of the numerous stab wounds she
sustained on her back probably caused by a pointed sharp-edged
instrument. Contusions on the forehead, neck and breast bone were also
noted the laceration on the right side of the hymen was caused within 24
hours of her death and the genitalia showed signs of inflammation.
Crime Charged: Rape with homicide
RTC: Rape with homicide
SC: Only homicide
2
ART. 335. When and how rape is committed. Rape is committed by having
carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances.
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.
As the victim here was six years old, only carnal knowledge had to
be proved to establish rape. Carnal knowledge is defined as the act of a man
having sexual intercourse or sexual bodily connections with a woman. For
this purpose, it is enough if there was even the slightest contact of the male
sex organ with the labia of the victim’s genitalia. However, there must be
proof, by direct or indirect evidence, of such contact.
Hymenal laceration is not necessary to prove rape; neither does its
presence prove its commission. As held in People v. Ulili, a medical
certificate or the testimony of the physician is presented not to prove that the
victim was raped but to show that the latter had lost her
virginity. Consequently, standing alone, a physicians finding that the hymen
of the alleged victim was lacerated does not prove rape. It is only when this is
corroborated by other evidence proving carnal knowledge that rape may be
deemed to have been established.
This conclusion is based on the medically accepted fact that a hymenal
tear may be caused by objects other than the male sex organ or may arise
from other causes. Dr. Bandonill himself admitted this. He testified that the
right side of the victims hymen had been completely lacerated while the
surrounding genital area showed signs of inflammation. He opined that the
laceration had been inflicted within 24 hours of the victims death and that the
inflammation was due to a trauma in that area. When asked by the private
prosecutor whether the lacerations of the hymen could have been caused by
the insertion of a male organ he said this was possible. But he also said
when questioned by the defense that the lacerations could have been
caused by something blunt other than the male organ.
To be sure, this Court has sustained a number of convictions for
rape with homicide based on purely circumstantial evidence. In those
instances, however, the prosecution was able to present other tell-tale signs
of rape such as the location and description of the victims clothings,
especially her undergarments, the position of the body when found and the
like.
In contrast, in the case at bar, there is no circumstantial evidence
from which to infer that accused-appellant sexually abused the victim. The
only circumstance from which such inference might be made is that accused-
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
appellant was seen with the victim walking toward the place where the girls
body was found. Maybe he raped the girl. Maybe he did not. Maybe he
simply inserted a blunt object into her organ, thus causing the lacerations in
the hymen. Otherwise, there is no circumstance from which it might
reasonably be inferred that he abused her, e.g., that he was zipping up his
pants, that there was spermatozoa in the girls vaginal canal.
Considering the relative physical positions of the accused and the
victim in crimes of rape, the usual location of the external bodily injuries of
the victim is on the face, neck, and anterior portion of her body. Although it is
not unnatural to find contusions on the posterior side, these are usually
caused by the downward pressure on the victims body during the sexual
assault. It is unquestionably different when, as in this case, all the stab
wounds (except for a minor cut in the lower left leg) had their entry points at
the back running from the upper left shoulder to the lower right buttocks.
It is noteworthy that the deceased was fully clothed in blue shorts and
white shirt when her body was brought to her parents house immediately
after it was found. Furthermore, there is a huge bloodstain in the back portion
of her shorts. This must be because she was wearing this piece of clothing
when the stab wounds were inflicted or immediately thereafter, thus allowing
the blood to seep into her shorts to such an extent. As accused-appellant
would naturally have to pull down the girls lower garments in order to
consummate the rape, then, he must have, regardless of when the stab
wounds were inflicted, pulled up the victims shorts and undergarments after
the alleged rape,otherwise, the victims shorts would not have been stained
so extensively. Again, this is contrary to ordinary human experience.
B. Documentation of injuries
1. Union Motors vs. NLRC
UNION MOTOR CORPORATION, vs.NLRC and ALEJANDRO A. ETIS
FACTS: Alejandro A. Etis was hired by Union Motor as an automotive
mechanic. On September 22, 1997, the respondent made a phone call to
Rosita dela Cruz, the company nurse, and informed her that he had to take a
sick leave as he had a painful and unbearable toothache. The next day, he
again phoned Dela Cruz and told her that he could not report for work
because he still had to consult a doctor. Dr. Rodolfo Pamor, a dentist, then
scheduled the respondent’s tooth extraction on September 27, 1997, but
rescheduled the respondent’s tooth extraction on October 4, 1997 because
the inflammation had not yet subsided and recommended that he rest. Thus,
3
the respondent was not able to report for work due to the painful and
unbearable toothache.
On October 2, 1997, Union Motor Issued an Inter Office Memorandum
terminating the services of the Alejandro for having incurred more than five
(5) consecutive absences without proper notification. The petitioner
considered the consecutive absences of the respondent as abandonment of
office.
On October 4, 1997, Dr. Pamor successfully extracted the respondent’s
tooth. As soon as he had recovered, the respondent reported for work, but
was denied entry into the company’s premises and he was informed that his
employment have been terminated.
He sought help from the employees union.
 NCMB – Dismissed his complaint
 Labor Arbiter – Dismissed the complaint ruling that his 10-day
absence without leave due to severe toothache leading to a tooth
extraction was unsubstantiated. The Labor Arbiter stressed that
"unnotarized medical certificates were self-serving and had no
probative weight."
 NLRC - Reversed the decision of the Labor Arbiter and ordered
Union Motor to immediately reinstate complainant.It ruled that the
medical certificates issued by the doctor and dentist who attended to
the respondent substantiated the latter’s medical problem. It also
declared that the lack of notarization of the said certificates was not a
valid justification for their rejection as evidence.
 CA - affirmed in toto the NLRC Resolution.
The CA agreed with the ruling of the NLRC that medical certificates
need not be notarized in order to be admitted in evidence and
accorded full probative weight. It held that the medical certificates
which bore the names and licenses of the doctor and the dentist who
attended to the respondent adequately substantiated the latter’s
illness, as well as the tooth extraction procedure performed on him
by the dentist. The CA concluded that since the respondent’s
absences were substantiated, the petitioner’s termination of his
employment was without legal and factual basis.
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Petitioner now avers that the medical certificates adduced in evidence by the
respondent to prove (a) his illness, the nature and the duration of the
procedures performed by the dentist on him; and (b) the period during which
he was incapacitated to work are inadmissible in evidence and barren of
probative weight simply because they were not notarized, and it was not
written on paper bearing the dentist’s letterhead. It further argues that even
assuming that the respondent was ill and had been advised by his dentist to
rest, the same does not appear on the medical certificate, hence, it behooved
the respondent to report for work.
ISSUE: Whether or not notarization is required before Medical Certificates
can be accepted as evidence.
HELD: Nowhere in our jurisprudence requires that all medical certificates be
notarized to be accepted as a valid evidence. In this case, there is neither
difficulty nor an obstacle to claim that the medical certificates presented by
complainant are genuine and authentic. Indeed, the physician and the dentist
who examined the complainant, aside from their respective letterheads, had
written their respective license numbers below their names and signatures.
These facts have not been impugned nor rebutted by respondent-appellee
throughout the proceedings of his case. Common sense dictates that an
ordinary worker does not need to have these medical certificates to be
notarized for proper presentation to his company to prove his ailment; hence,
the Labor Arbiter a quo, in cognizance with the liberality and the appreciation
on the rules on evidence, must not negate the acceptance of these medical
certificates as valid pieces of evidence.
We believe, as we ought to hold, that the medical certificates can prove
clearly and convincingly the complainant’s allegation that he consulted a
physician because of tooth inflammation on September 23, 1997 and a
dentist who later advised him to rest and, thus, clinically extended his tooth
extraction due to severe pain and inflammation. Admittingly, it was only on
October 4, 1997 that complainant’s tooth was finally extracted.
While the records do not reveal that the respondent filed the required leave
of absence for the period during which he suffered from a toothache, he
immediately reported for work upon recovery, armed with medical certificates
to attest to the cause of his absence. The respondent could not have
anticipated the cause of his illness, thus, to require prior approval would be
unreasonable.While it is true that the petitioner had objected to the veracity
of the medical certificates because of lack of notarization, it has been said
that verification of documents is not necessary in order that the said
documents could be considered as substantial evidence. The medical
certificates were properly signed by the physicians; hence, they bear all the
4
earmarks of regularity in their issuance and are entitled to full probative
weight.
2. People vs. Basite
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. EDDIE BASITE, appellant.
BELLOSILLO, J.:
FACTS:
EDDIE BASITE was convicted by the trial court of simple rape,
sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay complaining
witness P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral
damages. He now appeals his conviction.
Sonia Pa-ay, a polio victim, was at the time of the rape nineteen (19)
years old and a student of midwifery at the Cordillera College, Buyagan, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
At the police station, Sonia was advised to undergo medical
examination. She went to the Abatan Emergency Hospital for the physical
examination, and to the Lutheran Hospital for the laboratory tests. She was
issued a medical certificate. The following day Sonia filed her Sworn
Statement and a criminal complaint was formally lodged with the Fiscals
Office against Eddie Basite.
An Information for Rape was filed against the accused who pleaded not
guilty when arraigned. The prosecution presented Dr. Relante Raper of the
Abatan Emergency Hospital who testified on the medical findings he made
upon examination of Sonia Pa-ay. When Sonia presented herself for
examination, Dr. Raper observed that her clothes were muddy. He found
mud on her right breast and on her pubic hair. There were multiple healing
scratches and contusions on her arms, legs and inner thighs which could
have been caused by the application of an external force or the impact of a
fall. Internal examination revealed that there were no lacerations, scratches
or bleeding on the perineal area and her hymen was intact. The vagina
admitted one (1) finger with difficulty. A whitish mucoid discharge found over
the labia minora was sent to the Lutheran Hospital for microscopy.
Examination of the discharge yielded negative for sperm. Dr. Raper clarified
that it was possible, even for a married woman, to have an intact hymen
since there are some hymen that are very elastic.
The accused denied having raped Sonia. To support his defense, the
accused presented Dr. Ronald Bandonill of the NBI-CAR, Baguio City, as an
expert witness to dispute the findings of prosecution witness Dr. Relante
Raper. Based on Dr. Rapers findings that there was no bleeding or scratches
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
inside the genitalia and that the injuries were only outside the genital area
and on the upper and lower extremities of Sonia, Dr. Bandonill opined that
there was no insertion into the vagina and there was no physical contact or
sexual intercourse. Otherwise, the genital area would have shown signs of
trauma such as inflammation, redness, swelling and even bleeding if the
hymen was the type that was easily lacerated. Dr. Bandonill added that the
Medico-Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Raper was incomplete and
incomprehensive and not compatible with standard Medico-Legal Reports of
the NBI in rape cases.
The trial court agreed with Dr. Bandonill that the Medico-Legal
Certificate issued by Dr. Raper was insufficient to conclude that sexual
intercourse actually took place, since it failed to indicate whether the labia
and vagina of private complainant were thoroughly examined to determine
sexual contact. However, it still found the accused guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime charged based on Sonias spontaneous, forthright and
positive testimony identifying the accused as the person who raped her.
Accused-appellant assails the decision of the trial court. He argues that
the trial court already entertained reasonable doubt as to his guilt when it
ruled that the Medico-Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Raper was
incomprehensive and inconclusive as to the occurrence of sexual contact
between him and complainant. Accused-appellant reasons that the court a
quo should have taken this point in his favor and acquitted him.
ISSUE:
HELD:
The accused fails to persuade us.
Accused-appellant harps on the fact that the trial court discounted the
Medico-Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Raper. This allegedly shows
reasonable doubt as to the fact of sexual intercourse between accused-
appellant and private complainant. On this matter, jurisprudence holds that
even without a medical examination, the accused may still be convicted of
rape as long as the testimony of the complainant meets the test of credibility
and resolutely points to the accused as the author of the crime. A medical
certificate is not indispensable to prove rape.
The defense further avers that Sonias testimony of rape is inconsistent
with the findings of Dr. Raper that there were no lacerations in her vagina
and that her hymen was intact. But the absence of fresh lacerations in the
vagina does not prove that private complainant was not sexually abused. For
rape to be consummated, rupture of the hymen is not necessary, nor is it
essential that the vagina sustains a laceration. Research in medicine even
points out that negative findings are of no significance, since the hymen may
not be torn despite repeated coitus. Entry of the labia or lips of the female
organ, without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina, is sufficient to
5
warrant conviction. In this case, Sonia categorically testified that accused-
appellant inserted his penis into her vagina and she felt pain when he did so.
As to the opinions of defense expert witness Dr. Bandonill, it is
important to note that the testimony of expert witnesses must be construed to
have been presented not to sway the court in favor of any of the parties, but
to assist the court in the determination of the issue before it. It has been said
of expert testimonies -
Although courts are not ordinarily bound by expert testimonies, they
may place whatever weight they may choose upon such testimonies in
accordance with the facts of the case. The relative weight and
sufficiency of expert testimony is peculiarly within the province of the
trial court to decide, considering the ability and character of the witness,
his actions upon the witness stand, the weight and process of the
reasoning by which he has supported his opinion, his possible bias in
favor of the side for whom he testifies, the fact that he is a paid witness,
the relative opportunities for study and observation of the matters about
which he testifies, and any other matters which deserve to illuminate his
statements. The opinion of the expert may not be arbitrarily rejected; it is
to be considered by the court in view of all the facts and circumstances
in the case and when common knowledge utterly fails, the expert
opinion may be given controlling effect. The problem of the credibility of
the expert witness and the evaluation of his testimony is left to the
discretion of the trial court whose ruling thereupon is not reviewable in
the absence of abuse of discretion.
Dr. Bandonills expertise in the medical examination of rape victims was
displayed in court. He clearly explained the external and internal changes
that happen to a womans body after consensual intercourse and rape, and
what findings may be had in the examination of a rape victim. Dr. Bandonills
opinion on the rape case is based on the findings made by Dr. Raper in his
Medico-Legal Certificate. He did not personally examine private
complainant. Based on the Medico-Legal Certificate alone, Dr. Bandonill
surmised that there was no sexual contact between accused-appellant and
complainant. He was however also of the view that the physical examination
and Medico-Legal Certificate of Sonia Pa-ay were incomplete and not
comprehensive as compared to the required Medical Report of the NBI. As
the trial court found, the Certificate failed to indicate whether the labia and
vagina of the private complainant were thoroughly examined to determine if
sexual contact took place.
That the trial court considered Dr. Bandonills expert testimony to rule on
the sufficiency of the Medico-Legal Certificate issued by Dr. Raper does not
mean that the court a quo doubted accused-appellants guilt. The trial court
merely used Dr. Bandonills testimony to determine for itself if that Medico-
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Legal Certificate would satisfactorily show the results of a complete and
thorough physical examination of Sonia Pa-ay, consistent with the physical
examinations being conducted by the NBI and Dr. Bandonill.
WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision of the court a quo finding
accused-appellant EDDIE BASITE guilty of simple rape and sentencing him
to reclusion perpetua and to pay complaining witness Sonia Pa-ay the
amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages
is AFFIRMED. Costs against accused-appellant.
3. People vs. Alverio
People vs. Alverio
Facts: In the afternoon of June 2, 2002, AAA, along with her friends Belen
and Aileen, went to the house of her grandmother to attend a dance event. At
around 8:30 in the evening, they proceeded to the dance hall because the
dance would start at around 9 o’clock. During the dance, Belen and Aileen
danced with Alverio but AAA did not. At 2 o’clock in the morning of June 3,
2002, AAA noticed that her friends were no longer at the dance so she
decided to go home to her grandmother’s house.
As she was nearing the barangay hall, Alverio suddenly appeared and took
hold of AAA. She tried to resist him but he was too strong and he managed
to pull her away. AAA started to cry while she was being dragged towards
the back of the barangay hall. There, Alverio held her hair, undressed her,
and started to kiss her. AAA kept on resisting and even punched Alverio after
he kissed her, at which point, Alverio told her that it was painful and that he
might retaliate if she continued. This caused AAA to stop resisting and
Alverio then proceeded to insert his penis in her vagina repeatedly.
After having carnal knowledge with her, Alverio stood up and put on his
clothes. He warned AAA that if she told anyone about what happened, he will
kill her.13 After threatening her, he left
Issue: Whether or not the medical certificate can be considered as
corroborative evidence although the signatory of the said certificate never
testified to its contents
Held: Alverio submits that although the medical certificate was presented as
evidence, its contents were never testified to by the signatory himself and, as
6
such, cannot be considered as corroborative of the claim of the victim that
she was raped.
Such argument, however, cannot prosper. Medical evidence is dispensable
and merely corroborative in proving the crime of rape. Besides, a medical
certificate is not even necessary to prove the crime of rape. The gravamen of
rape is carnal knowledge of a woman through force and intimidation.
The elements needed to prove the crime of rape under paragraph 1(a) of
Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code are: (1) the offender is a man; (2)
the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (3) the act is
accomplished by using force or intimidation. All these elements were
sufficiently proved by the prosecution. The testimony of AAA overwhelmingly
proves that Alverio raped her with the use of force and intimidation.
4. People vs. Colorado
PEOPLE VS COLORADO
Facts:
AAA testified that sometime in December 2002, her parents attended a
wedding leaving behind AAA, her brother Neil Colorado and their two other
brothers in the house. When their parents had not yet arrived in the evening,
Colorado committed the dastardly act against AAA. She was twelve (12)
years old at that time, while Colorado was already twenty-four (24) years old.
He approached AAA, held her two hands, even threatened her with a knife
and covered her mouth with a handkerchief. He then removed AAA’s shorts
and panty, inserted his penis into the young girl’s vagina, then made a push
and pull movement. Colorado later left AAA, who put back her shorts and
underwear, but remained awake because of fear and trauma with what she
had gone through.
On that same night, Colorado raped AAA twice more, unmindful of the
presence of their two other brothers who were then sleeping. In both
instances, Colorado still threatened AAA with a knife, removed her shorts
and panty, inserted his penis into his sister’s vagina, then performed the
push and pull movement. Colorado warned AAA that he would stab her
should she report to anyone what he had done. AAA then did not dare reveal
these incidents to anybody, until she had the courage to report them to their
mother. Also in her testimony before the trial court, AAA disclosed that she
had been raped by Colorado when she was just nine (9) years old. She also
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
revealed having been ravished on different dates by another brother, DDD,
and a brother-in-law.
Colorado pleaded “not guilty” upon arraignment. During the pre-trial, the
parties stipulated on the following: (1) the existence of the Medico Legal
Certificate and the Birth Certificate of AAA; (2) that Colorado is a full-blood
brother of AAA; and (3) that Colorado and AAA lived under the same roof.
A Medico-Legal Certificate6 prepared by Dr. Ma. Teresa Sanchez (Dr.
Sanchez), Medical Officer III of the Western Pangasinan District Hospital
contained the following findings:
=INTERNAL EXAM FINDINGS:
-Nonparous Introitus- -Hymenal laceration at 6 o’clock position with
bleeding-
-Vagina admits 2 fingers with slight resistance- -Uterus small- -(+) bleeding-
x x x x7
Colorado denied having raped AAA, arguing that he was not living with AAA
in their parents’ house in December 2002. Allegedly, he was at that time
staying with an older sister in Osmeña, Dasol. Colorado claimed that on the
night of the alleged incident, he was fishing with his brother-in-law, and that
they returned to Osmeña, Dasol in the morning of the following day.
ISSUE: (1)WON Colorodo is guilty of rape
(2) WON Medical Certificate is essential for the conviction of rape
RTC: guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape, and
sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
ON APPEAL: defenses of denial and alibi. He further sought his acquittal by
arguing that the hymenal lacerations discovered by AAA’s examining doctor,
and considered by the trial court in determining his culpability, could have
been caused not by him, but by the sexual aggressions committed by their
brother DDD or their brother-in-law unto AAA.
CA: Guilty
SC: Guilty
Colorado was charged with the crime of rape, qualified by the victim’s
minority and her relationship to her ravisher, as defined and penalized under
Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B, of the Revised Penal Code (RPC),
as follows:
Art. 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. – Rape is committed:
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of
the following circumstances:
7
a. Through force, threat or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is
demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be
present.
xxxx Art. 266-B. Penalties. – x x x. xxxx
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender
is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or
affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent
of the victim;
xxxx
Both the RTC and the CA correctly ruled on the concurrence of the following
elements of qualified rape, as defined in the aforequoted provisions of the
RPC: (1) that the victim is a female over 12 years but under 18 years of age;
(2) that the offender is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian or relative
by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law
spouse of the parent of the victim; and (3) that the offender has carnal
knowledge of the victim either through force, threat or intimidation; or when
she is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious; or by means of
fraudulent machinations or grave abuse of authority.
The age of the victim at the time of the crime’s commission is undisputed.
During the pre-trial, the parties agreed on the existence of AAA’s Certificate
of Live Birth,11 a “certified true/xerox copy” of which forms part of the records
and provides that AAA was born on October 10, 1990. AAA was then only 12
years old in December 2002, a significant fact that was sufficiently alleged in
the Information. In People v. Pruna,12 we held that the best evidence to
prove the age of the offended party is an original or certified true copy of the
certificate of live birth of such party.
As to the second element, there is no dispute that Colorado is a full- blood
brother of AAA, as this was also among the parties’ stipulated facts during
the case’s pre-trial.
The grounds now being raised by Colorado to justify his exoneration delve
mainly on the alleged absence of the crime’s third element. He denies AAA’s
claim that he had ravished her, raising the defense of alibi and the alleged
doubt and suspicion that should be ascribed to AAA’s accusations. On this
matter, settled is the rule that the findings of the trial court on the credibility of
a witness deserve great weight, given the clear advantage of a trial judge in
the appreciation of testimonial evidence. We have repeatedly recognized that
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
the trial court is in the best position to assess the credibility of witnesses and
their testimonies, because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses
first hand and to note their demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grueling
examination.
We then take due consideration of the trial court’s findings of fact, its
assessment of AAA’s credibility, her testimony and the manner by which her
statements were relayed. The testimony of [AAA] is simple, candid,
straightforward and consistent on material points detailing every single
bestial act of her brother in ravishing her. Moreover, [AAA] on several
occasions (August 1, 2006 and September 19, 2006) was on the verge of
crying and in fact shed tears during her direct examination. Crying of the
victim during her testimony is evidence of the credibility of the rape charge
with the verity born out of human nature and experience
Though a medical certificate is not necessary to prove the commission of
rape but when the victim’s testimony is corroborated by the physician’s
findings of penetration (Exh. “A”) or hymenal laceration as when the hymen is
no longer intact, there is sufficient foundation to find the existence of the
essential requisite of carnal knowledge. Further, no young and decent
woman in her right mind especially of tender age as that of [AAA] who is
fifteen (15) years old would concoct a story of defloration, allow [an]
examination of her private parts and thereafter pervert herself by being
subjected to a public trial, if she was not motivated solely by he[r] desire to
obtain justice for the wrong committed against her.
During cross-examination,AAA remained steadfast, unwavering and
spontaneous. Significantly also, her testimony is supported by the medical
evidence on record, which showed that she had a laceration in her hymen
and was thus in a non-virgin state.
AAA had positively identified Colorado as her rapist. Such identification of
Colorado could not have been difficult for AAA considering that Colorado was
a brother who lived with her in their parents’ house. Even the failure of AAA
to identify the exact date of the crime’s commission is inconsequential to
Colorado’s conviction. In rape cases, the date of commission is not an
essential element of the offense; what is material is its occurrence, a fact that
was sufficiently established given AAA’s and her testimony’s credibility.
Time and again, we have taken into consideration how rapists are not
deterred by the presence of people nearby, such as the members of their
own family inside the same room, with the likelihood of being discovered,
since lust respects no time, locale or circumstance.
As against AAA’s credible testimony, Colorado’s defenses lack persuasion.
While Colorado denied in his testimony that he lived with AAA, such fact was
8
already admitted by the parties during the pre-trial. His defense that he was
in Osmeña, Dasol at the time of the crime’s commission was even
uncorroborated by any other witness. By jurisprudence, denial is an
intrinsically weak defense which must be buttressed by strong evidence of
non-culpability to merit credibility. Mere denial, without any strong evidence
to support it, can scarcely overcome the positive declaration by the child-
victim of the identity of the appellant and his involvement in the crime
attributed to him.Moreover, for the defense of alibi to prosper, two requisites
must concur: first, the appellant was at a different place at the time the crime
was committed; and second, it was physically impossible for him to be at the
crime scene at the time of its commission.The defense failed to establish
these requisites.
(2) Colorado also questions the weight of Dr. Sanchez’s medico-legal
certificate, arguing that AAA’s hymenal lacerations could have resulted from
the sexual aggressions allegedly committed against her by DDD and their
brother-in-law. Such contention, however, deserves no consideration, given
that results of an offended party’s medical examination are merely
corroborative in character. As explained by the Court in People v. Balonzo,21
a medical certificate is not necessary to prove the commission of rape, as
even a medical examination of the victim is not indispensable in a
prosecution for rape. Expert testimony is merely corroborative in character
and not essential to conviction. An accused can still be convicted of rape on
the basis of the sole testimony of the private complainant.22 Furthermore,
laceration of the hymen, even if considered the most telling and irrefutable
physical evidence of sexual assault, is not always essential to establish the
consummation of the crime of rape. In the context that is used in the RPC,
“carnal knowledge,” unlike its ordinary connotation of sexual intercourse,
does not necessarily require that the vagina be penetrated or that the hymen
be ruptured.23 Thus, even granting that AAA’s lacerations were not
caused by Colorado, the latter could still be declared guilty of rape, after it
was established that he succeeded in having carnal knowledge of the victim.
C. Physical Injuries in different parts of the body
1. Yadao vs. People
YADAO VS PEOPLE
FACTS:
It was the birthday of Artemio Yadao on October 1, 1988. He had a few
guests over at his house to help him celebrate it. Yadao noticed the victim,
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Deogracias Gundran to be milling around with the guests and was already
drinking gin. At around 3:45 p.m., while Yadao was sitting on one end of a
bench, Deogracias, who was lying down on the other end of the same bench,
suddenly stood up. The bench tilted due to the weight of Yadao, thus,
causing him to fall to the ground. Deogracias went over to Yadao and began
boxing him on the stomach. Yadao's wife tried to pacify her nephew but
Deogracias got a can opener and tried to stab Yadao with it. Yadao deflected
said attempt and delivered a slap on the face of the Deogracias. But because
he was already intoxicated, Deogracias lost his balance, hit his head on the
edge of a table and fell to the ground landing on his behind. Deogracias left
the house of Yadao and went to the house of Carmelita Limon who was the
sister of his friend. Limon noticed a lump on the forehead of Deogracias. The
latter told her that he came from the birthday party of Yadao. He complained
of pain on his breast/stomach area, the area where he claimed to have been
hit by Yadao. Two days later, Teofilo Gundran, the father of Deogracias was
informed that his son was having difficulty breathing. Teofilo proceeded to
where Deogracias was. Teofilo saw Deogracias sitting on an "arinola"
gasping for breath. He then held the two hands of Deogracias until the latter
expired. On the same day that he died, the body of Deogracias was
autopsied by Dr. Magdalena Alambra. Alambra found that the cause of the
death of Deogracias was cardio respiratory arrest due to pulmonary
tuberculosis. She also said that although a hematoma was present on the
forehead, she did not consider it as the cause of death as hematoma alone
will not cause the death of a person especially seven to eight days later. She
also opened the skull of the victim to study the latter's brain and she did not
see anything unusual. Disbelieving that cardiac arrest secondary to
tuberculosis was the cause of death of his son, Teofilo had the victim's body
re-autopsied, this time by the National Bureau of Investigation. The re-
autopsy was conducted by Dr. Arturo G. Llavore eight days after the first
autopsy. Dr. Llavore testified that the cause of death of the victim was the
collective effect of all the injuries sustained by the latter on the head. The
RTC found Yadao guilty of the crime of homicide. The CA affirmed the
judgment of conviction.
ISSUE: Whether or not the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of Yadao
beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of the testimony of Dr. Llavore's and
his autopsy report
RULING:
No. To make an offender liable for the death of the victim, it must be proven
that the death is the natural consequence of the physical injuries inflicted.
The testimonial and documentary evidence of the prosecution are insufficient
to find Yadao guilty as charged. This Court's doubt is brought about by Dr.
Llavore's failure to account the effects of the following facts: 1) that the
cadaver had previously been autopsied; 2) that during the first autopsy, Dr.
Alambra opened up the skull of the victim to physically examine his brain and
9
did not see anything out of the ordinary, neither blood clot and/or pooling nor
any swelling; 3) that the cadaver of the victim had already been embalmed;
4) that it had not been established for how long the embalming fluid was
supposed to stave off or delay the decomposition of the cadaver of the
victim; 5) that the re-autopsy was conducted eight (8) days after the death of
the victim; 6) that when the cadaver of the victim was re-autopsied,
decomposition may have already set in despite the body having been
embalmed; and 7) the hematoma was merely on the scalp – nowhere near
the brain as the area was still outside of the skull. Also, a dead body must not
be embalmed before the autopsy. Even if the cadaver of the victim may not
have started decomposing at the time of the re-autopsy, all the same, the
fact that such had already been embalmed, any examination will likely lead to
findings or conclusion not at all accurate as to the true status of the tissues of
the body of the victim. Yadao must be acquitted.
2. People vs. Orzame
PEOPLE VS EMETERIO ORZAME
GR. NO. 17773 May 19, 1966
Facts: The deceased Juan Dulay had an insurance in the amount of P3,000
and one of the accused, EmeterioOrzame was his sole beneficiary. Orzame,
Gallarde and Magno hatched up a plan to kill Dulay in order to be able to split
the proceeds of the insurance among themselves. On February 23, 1958, the
three accused carried out their wicked plans by deceiving Dulay with the help
of Orzame. Orzame, after meeting with the other accused brought Dulay to
the outskirts of Guimba in Nueva Ecija. They stopped by the railroad tracks
at barrio Balingog under the pretense of getting some rest. Orzame took
advantage of the situation and pulled out the Thompson sub-machine gun he
had in his bayong and hit Dulay with it for several times on the right ear, face
and back of the head while the latter was sitting unsuspectingly. The attack
of Orzame caused Dulay’s instant death.Upon instruction of Orzame, the
body of the deceased was carried to barrio Calibungan Victoria, Tarlac,
where, although already dead, it was still subjected to further beatings with
the Thompson sub-machine gun causing the brain to scatter, and was also
stabbed on the face with a knife several times by Orzame. Then the
deceased was lain across the railroad track to simulate a train accident as
the cause of death. The following day, February 24, 1958, the body of the
deceased Juan Dulay was found lying near the railroad tracks and among
those who saw it was JeremiasDamo who identified the deceased as Juan
Dulay.
Accused Dulay raised the defense of alibi and alleged that he fell sick and
was kept in a bed a week before February 23, 1958. A certain Dr.Castañeda,
in corroborating the alibi of Orzame, alleged that he arrived in Orzame's
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
house at 4:00 o'clock p.m. on February 23, 1958; that after examining
Orzame he diagnosed the illness as lobar pneumonia with high fever,
headache, and in a state of delirium; that he gave some antibiotics, plus
supportive medicines as caffein, sodium benzoate to support the heart, and
other drugs. Further, Orzame raised that he treated Dulay as his own
brother, thus he could not kill him.
Accused Magno was discharged from the complaint and was made a state
witness. It is for this reason that Orzame assails his testimony and credibility
as a witness.
Issue/s: Is there sufficient basis to convict EmeterioOrzame of murder for the
death of Juan Dulay?
Ruling: Yes. First, alibi as a defense is weak for it is easy to concoct. For this
reason, the courts view it with caution and accept it only when proved by
positive, clear and satisfactory evidence. In this particular case, the lower
court doubted seriously the testimony of accused Orzame because when the
said accused was on the witness stand he was restless and somewhat
trembling, to which the said court called his attention twice.
As to the credibility of Magno as witness, the court held that the testimony of
only one witness, if credible and positive ... if it satisfies the court beyond
reasonable doubt, is sufficient to convict". The testimony of the witness
Magno taken together with the post mortem examination of the victim’s body
suffices to hold Orzame liable for Juan Dulay’s death.
The post mortem examinations on the body of the victim made on February
24, 1959, at 12:30 p.m.:
x xx x xx x xx
4. Plenty of clotted blood in front, neck and back of his polo shirt and
few spotted blood in front of his trousers corresponding to the thighs.
5. The skull of his head at the vertex was badly battered and opened
crosswise and most of the brain substance was missing and the
remaining brain substance appeared like mash potatoes with small
amount of blood mixed with it.
6. Punctured wound of the middle of his chin in front, punctured
wound just below the left nostril, punctured wound 1 cm. lateral to
the left bridge of his nose, punctured wound between the eyebrows
and clotted blood at the surface of each wound.
7. The face was greatly deformed and swollen with clotted blood all
around, with depression of the lower forehead the bridge of his nose
and the upper jaw at the front including the skull sockets of the eyes.
10
 8. No findings of external violence at the other parts of his body.
9. The cadaver was already at the state of rigor mortis so that he
might have been killed 10 hours before autopsy and probably the
assailants only dumped him in one of the rails of the railroad to
disguise that he had been run over by the train.
AUTOPSY FINDINGS:
1. Head and Neck
(a) The skull of his head at the vertex was badly battered and
opened crosswise as a result of the bumper of the train striking it,
part of the skull missing so that most of the brain substance
appeared like mash potatoes with small amount of blood mixed with
it.
(b) The skull of the lower portion of the forehead was fractured
crosswise including the skull sockets of both eyes injuring both optic
nerves including the upper jaw in front was fractured causing the
removal of the first two incisors teeth.
x xx x xx x xx
Impression of the case is that the cause of death was due to severe
traumatic shock as a result of the blows inflicted upon him causing the
fracture of the skull of the lower portion of the forehead at the middle
including the skull sockets of both eyes injuring both optic nerves, fracture of
the bridge of his nose, crosswise, fracture of the upper jaw in front resulting
in the removal of the first two incisors teeth.
All fof this confirmthe veracity of Magno's testimony that the victim was struck
with the handle of the sub-machine gun and stabbed with a knife by the
accused several times.
E. Gunshot Wounds
1. People vs. Enolva
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. CRESENCIANO “SONNY” ENOLVA
G.R. No. 131633-34 January 25, 2000
FACTS:
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
At about 7:00 in the evening, Pedro Abunda was inside their house listening
to the radio program Reyna Bandida with his cousin. A little bit farther from
him were his father, Rogelio Abunda, and his half-sister, Julie Abunda, who
were already sleeping. Suddenly, he heard a gunshot. Pedro rolled down the
side of the house through the wall made only of woven coconut leaves.
When he rolled down, he saw CresencianoEnolvaat the other end of the
house, in a half squatting, half kneeling position with his hands extended and
two fingers pointing inside the wall. While he was in this position, he heard a
second gunshot. Thereafter, Pedro went to his Rogelio and Julie, and the two
were brought to the Bicol Regional Hospital. Rogelio died along the way from
hemorrhagic shock secondary to two gunshot wounds. Julie died the next
day due to the gunshot wound that she sustained which caused a raptured
spleen and lacerated lung parenchyma. As such, two informations were filed,
charging accused with two counts of murder.
Dr. Antonio Borja Estanislao, the Municipal Health Officer who issued
the post mortem certificate, testified that the cadaver at the time of the
examination, was already in the state of rigor mortis. There were two gunshot
wounds found on the body. The first, was found on the armpit, 2 cm. In
diameter, with its edges inverted, (edges were directed inwards) with
contusion collar (there was a contusion right around the wound) and with
gunpowder tattoing (blackened area around the wound). This was allegedly
the entry wound.The second wound, also 2 cm. In diameter, its edges
everted anterolateral aspect, was found on the front left shoulder. This is
allegedly the exit wound because the edges are directed outwards.Dr.
Estanislaoadded that either the victim's position was higher than the
assailant or the victim was lying down with the assailant in equal level as the
victim so that the direction of the slug was horizontal.
Major Lorlie Arroyo, a PNP member assigned as Forensic Chemist, testified
that she received the paraffin cast of both hands ofCresencianoEnolva. The
purpose of the laboratory examination was to determine the presence of
gunpowder residue (nitrates) in the specimen submitted to her laboratory
examination consisted of adding diphenylamine reagent to the dorsal portion
of the paraffin cast and thereafter, dark blue specks appeared on the cast
which is an indication of the presence of nitrates or gunpowder residue.
These findings were stated in her report in this manner: "Qualitative
examination conducted on the specimen mentioned above gave POSITIVE
result to the tests for the presence of gunpowder residue (nitrates).
Dr. RuelLebiRealuyo, the physician at the Bicol Regional Hospital who
conducted the autopsy on the cadaver of Julie, testified that the autopsy
report found two gunshot wounds, identified as point of entry: 0.5 cm.
Located at the posterior axillary line at the level of 2nd ICS right and as point
of exit: 3 cm 10th ICS posterior axillary line, left. He testified that upon
opening of the body of the victim, he noted the lung parenchyma to be
11
lacerated on the right side. He said the laceration of the lung parenchyma
was caused by the traversing bullet of the right side going to the left side.
The trial court convicted the accused of two counts of murder; hence, the
appeal.
ISSUE:
Whether or not CresencianoEnolva is guilty beyond reasonable of two counts
of murder on the ground, among others, that the gunpowder nitrates found
on him confirm the suspicion that it was he who perpetrated the crime.
HELD:
YES. Plain washing of the hands with water before the paraffin cast is done
will not remove the nitrates or gunpowder from the hand. If someone handled
fertilizer, like complete fertilizer which contains nitrates, it is possible to have
a blue speck of nitrates but its appearance would be different from the
nitrates residue coming from gunpowder. Even if firecrackers have been
exploded by the suspect, again there would be a difference from the nitrates
of gunpowder residue which is a distinct blue speck. A paraffin test is
conducted on the dorsal side of the hand because it is the portion which is
directly exposed to the firearm. In exploding firecrackers, the most
contaminated is the palm side of the hand not the dorsal side.
In the case, as a matter of fact, the technician, prior to the examination even
washes the hands of the suspect with plain water to eliminate contaminants
adhering to the hands of the suspect.Major Lorlie Arroyowas very positive
that the nitrates she found in her examination of the paraffin cast were
gunpowder residue.Major Arroyo on cross-examination explained that if
someone handled fertilizer, like complete fertilizer which contains nitrates, or
exploded firecrackers, the distinct blue speck of gunpowder residue would be
different. There is an "abundance of blue color" on the hands resulting from
the firing of a gunwhich makes it different from the residue left by exploding
firecrackers.
The subject is being washed first with plain water to get rid of the
contaminants as first, fertilizers and firecrackers they are adhering or they
are just above the skin, then they can be taken off when washing because if
they are not washed and directly examined this color especially of
firecrackers and fertilizers, there will be conglomeration or smudges of blue
color so the dirty appearance will be there, whereas, if they are washed
those adhering on the skin will be taken off and they are soluble in water, so
that is taken off. While that of nitrates coming from gunpowder, they are
embedded in the pores of the skin, so ordinary washing cannot be removed
from the skin. If they are examined, these nitrates from that embedded
portion of the skin would be appearing very neatly as dark blue specks.As to
why both hands of the suspect yielded positive result for nitrates. Major
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Arroyo testified that even if only one hand is used for firing a gun, the other
hand could be contaminated with gunpowder residue unless hidden from the
hand holding the gun.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED
2. Bayquen vs. CA
MARK BAYQUEN vs. COURT OF APPEALS AND THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 93851 March 6, 1992
MEDIALDEA, J.:
FACTS:
On July 23, 1984, at around 8:00 o'clock in the evening , the victim Teofilo
Estepa arrived home in his house, his sister Bernadette Estepa was home
and he told her that if anyone asked for him to say that he was asleep,
adding that he had nothing to do with what happened. Bernadette inquired
but Teofilo merely said "Pinasubodac", meaning "I was led into trouble".
The next day, their border Virgie Corpuz told Bernadette that Barangay
Captain Albert Della and Dr. Bayquen, father of Mark Bayquen, came to the
house looking for Teofilo and leaving word that if Teofilo did not show up that
same night they will pick him up on the first hour the following morning. At
that juncture, Teofilo arrived. Immediately, Virgie Corpuz told him what she
had just told Bernadette. Teofilo said that he had nothing to do with the
destruction of the motorcycle and he will tell what really happened if he had
to. Teofilo went out to look for appellant Wilfredo Boco whom he said was his
companion in the motorcycle incident, he however did not find Boco. He
asked her sister to wake him up at 4:00 a.m. the next day, July 25, 1984, so
he could review for his examinations.
Before 4:00 a.m. of July 25, 1984, Bernadette Estepa was awakened by a
commotion outside her room as if a door was being closed. She called out
her brother's name "Bong" but nobody answered. She notice from the space
under the door that the light on the sala was turned on so she got up and
tried to open the door but could not. It was as if somebody was pulling the
door knob outside. Thinking that it was only her brother, she returned to her
bed and went back to sleep. After about 5 minutes, she was awakened by
the alarm clock which she previously set at 4:00. She called out Bong several
times but nobody answered so she got up to wake him up per his request.
She opened the door, this time without any difficulty. Since the lights in the
12
sala and kitchen were on, showed immediately noticed Bong's room which is
about 13 meters from her's opened. She walked to the room but was
surprised to see it in complete disarray. Bongs books and beddings were
scattered on the floor. she looked for him in the other parts of the house but
could not find him. As she was calling his name she heard two gunshots
coming from downstairs. Immediately she went down and there she saw at
the stair landing her brother, Bong, lying face down. She lifted him up and
noticed that he was bleeding. She asked him "why". Bong answered in
Ilocos, "Pinaltogandak ken sinasakdak" (They shot and stabbed me.)
Bernadette asked him who did it and he answered clearly, "Mark Bayquen
and Boco". She helped him stand placing her arms around his shoulder and
up to their apartment at the second floor taking about 10 to 15 steps. They
proceeded to Notre Dame Hospital. On their way, Bernadette did not tell
anything to the police. It was about 20 minutes from the time Bernadette
discovered her brother bleeding up to the time they reached the emergency
room of the Norte Dame Hospital. An hour after, Teofilo was pronounced
dead on arrival. Again Bernadette kept mum about the death of her brother
but upon advise of Dra. Cabato, consented to the autopsy of the cadaver of
her brother.
Crime Charged: Homicide
RTC Ruling: Guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of Homicide
CA Ruling: Affirmed in toto the findings of the trial court
Issue: Did the autopsy as the evidence presented concur with the victim’s
dying declaration that he was shot and stabbed that will amount to
conviction?
SC RULING: NO. Accused is ACQUITTED.
The autopsy findings (Exh. "B") states:
xxx xxx xxx
4. Presence of a gunshot wound 1/8" in diameter; edges very black
located below and medial to the left nipple;
a). penetrating the chest wall between the 6th and 7th ribs, 2 inches
from the misternal line,
b) perforating the tip of the right ventricle
c) penetrating the left side of the diaphragm
d) perforating the liver
e) penetrating the right side of the diaphragm
f) perforating the lower lobe of the right lung
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
g) bullet lodged at the level of the right floating rib 4 inches from the
right posterior axillary line, Bullet is colored lead and copper, with a
diameter at its base of .38 in. and a length of 6/8 in. (Bullet given to
BCPD).
xxx xxx xxx
Dra. Florita Ferrer-Garcia, a physician of the Baguio General Hospital, who
conducted the autopsy, testified as follows:
Q In No. 4 of your post-mortem report, it is stated "presence of a
gunshot wound 1/8" in diameter." [I]s this the wound that caused the
ultimate death of the victim in this case Teofilo Estepa?
A Yes, sir.
Q You also mentioned . . .
COURT:
Q Will you please explain why that wound according to you was the
cause of the death of the victim?
A Because the wound has perforated vital organs which when
injured is fatal.
xxx xxx xxx
Q In letter "h" of this report Doctora which is marked a Exhibit "B"
there is mentioned of 2 slits 3/8" in length on the skin over where the
bullet is lodged. Would you please describe these slits and will you
give us an opinion what caused these slits?
A This slits is just a linear opening measuring 3/8 inch. in length,
over the skin. And underneath it is the bullet. The probable reason of
the slit is the foreign object underneath the skin which has caused
pressure on the skin but was not able to get out.
Q So, could we assume that these slits were caused by the impact of
the bullet going in?
A Yes, sir. (T.S.N., February 28, 1985, pp. 9-10)
Contrary, therefore to Bong Estepa's dying declaration that he was "shot and
stabbed", Bong Estepa died of a single gunshot wound. He was not stabbed.
In sum, the prosecution's case rest entirely upon the identification of
petitioner and Wilfredo Boco made to Bernadette Estepa by the deceased
Bong Estepa. As We have pointed out earlier, however, considering the
belated disclosure, We are not inclined to give weight to the alleged dying
declarations of Bong Estepa. As the Chief Justice in the Hernandez case
(supra), pointed out: "The ante mortem statements being thus relegated to
limbo, . . . very little remains by way of evidence upon which to rest a verdict
of conviction" against petitioner.
3. Custodio vs. Sandiganbayan
13
Custodio, et al v. Sandiganbayan
G.R. Nos. 96027-28; March 8, 2005
Puno, J.:
Facts:
Petitioners were members of the military and security detail of the late
Sen. Benigno Aquino, Jr. who escorted him upon his arrival in Manila
from his sojourn in the United States. While descending the plane,
Sen. Aquino was shot dead. His alleged gunman, Rolando Galman,
was also shot dead. Petitioners were then prosecuted for the double
murder of Galman and Aquino before the Sandiganbayan. The
Sandiganbayan acquitted the accused. Later, it was found out that the
trial before the Sandiganbayan was a sham trial. Thus, another trial
was conducted by the Sandiganbayan now finding the petitioners
guilty of the double murder of Aquino and Galman. The decision in
that case became final. However, petitioners sought to re-open the
case on the ground of newly discovered evidence. They argue that a
new batch of forensic experts have discovered evidence capable of
reversing the judgment against them.
Issue:
Should the findings of the Sandiganbayan with regard to the death of
Sen. Aquino be disturbed?
Held:
No, the Sandiganbayan's findings should not be disturbed. The
Sandiganbayan correctly appreciated the medico-legal findings
surrounding the death of Sen. Aquino.
This opinion of Dr. Bienvenido Muoz in this regard notwithstanding,
We hold that the trajectory of the fatal bullet which killed Sen. Benigno
Aquino, Jr. was, indeed, forward, downward and medially. For the
reason that the wound of entrance was at a higher elevation than the
wound of exit, there can be no other conclusion but that the trajectory
was downward. The bullet when traveling at a fast rate of speed takes
a straight path from the wound of entrance to the wound of exit. It is
unthinkable that the bullet, while projected upwards, would, instead of
exiting to the roof of the head, go down to the mandible because it
was allegedly deflected by a petrous bone which though hard is in fact
a mere spongy protuberance, akin to a cartilage.
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Clear is proof of the downward trajectory of the fatal bullet; First, as
Dr. Pedro Solis and Dr. Ceferino Cunanan, the immediate superiors of
Dr. Bienvenido Muoz, manifested before the Court, that, since the
wound of entrance appeared ovaloid and there is what is known as a
contusion collar which was widest at the superior portion, indicating
an acute angle of approach, a downward trajectory of the bullet is
indicated. This phenomenon indicates that the muzzle of the fatal gun
was at a level higher than that of the point of entry of the fatal bullet.
There was no showing as to whether a probe could have been made
from the wound of entrance to the petrous bone. Out of curiosity, Dr.
Juanito Billote tried to insert a probe from the wound of exit into the
petrous bone. He was unsuccessful notwithstanding four or five
attempts. If at all, this disproves the theory of Dr. Muoz that the
trajectory was upward, downward and medially. On the other hand,
Dr. Juanito Billote and photographer Alexander Loinaz witnessed the
fact that Dr. Muoz[s] understudy, Alejandrino Javier, had successfully
made a probe from the wound of entrance directly towards the wound
of exit. Alejandrino Javier shouted with excitement upon his success
and Alexander Loinaz promptly photographed this event with
Alejandrino Javier holding the protruding end of the probe at the
mandible.
To be sure, had the main bullet hit the petrous bone, this spongy
mash of cartilage would have been decimated or obliterated. The fact
that the main bullet was of such force, power and speed that it was
able to bore a hole into the mandible and crack it, is an indication that
it could not have been stopped or deflected by a mere petrous bone.
By its power and force, it must have been propelled by a powerful
gun. It would have been impossible for the main bullet to have been
deflected form an upward course by a mere spongy protuberance.
Granting that it was so deflected, however, it could not have
maintained the same power and force as when it entered the skull at
the mastoid region so as to crack the mandible and make its exit
there.
But what caused the fracture of the petrous bone? Was there a cause
of the fracture, other than that the bullet had hit it? Dr. Pedro Solis,
maintaining the conclusion that the trajectory of the bullet was
downward, gave the following alternative explanations for the fracture
of the petrous bone:
14
First, the petrous bone could have been hit by a splinter of the main
bullet, particularly, that which was found at the temporal region; and,
Second, the fracture must have been caused by the kinetic force
applied to the point of entrance at the mastoid region which had the
tendency of being radiated towards the petrous bone.
Thus, the fracture in the occipital bone, of the temporal bone, and of
the parietal bone, Dr. Pedro Solis pointed out, had been caused by
the aforesaid kinetic force. When a force is applied to the mastoid
region of the head, Dr. Pedro Solis emphasized, a radiation of forces
is distributed all over the cranial back, including, although not limited
to, the parietal bone. The skull, Dr. Solis explains, is a box-like
structure. The moment you apply pressure on the portion, a distortion,
tension or some other mechanical defect is caused. This radiation of
forces produces what is known as the spider web linear fracture which
goes to different parts of the body. The so-called fracturing of the
petrous portion of the left temporal bone is one of the consequences
of the kinetic force forcefully applied to the mastoid region.
The fact that there was found a fracture of the petrous bone is not
necessarily indicative of the theory that the main bullet passed
through the petrous bone.
Doubt was expressed by Dr. Pedro Solis as to whether the metal
fragments alleged by Dr. Bienvenido Muoz to have been found by him
inside the skull or at the wound of exit were really parts of the main
bullet which killed the Senator. When Dr. Pedro Solis examined these
fragments, he found that two (2) of the fragments were larger in size,
and were of such shapes, that they could not have gone out of the
wound of exit considering the size and shape of the exit wound.
Medico-legal Aspects of Death
1. Seguritan vs. People
ROO SEGURITAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 172896
DEL CASTILLO, J
FACTS:
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Petitioner was having a drinking session with his uncles Lucrecio), Melchor
and Baltazar. Petitioner, who was seated beside Lucrecio, claimed that
Lucrecio’s carabao entered his farm and destroyed his crops. A heated
discussion ensued, during which petitioner punched Lucrecio twice as the
latter was about to stand up. Petitioner’s punches landed on Lucrecio’s right
and left temple, causing him to fall face-up to the ground and hit a hollow
block which was being used as an improvised stove.
Lucrecio lost consciousness but was revived with the assistance of Baltazar.
Thereafter, Lucrecio proceeded to his house. Upon his arrival, his wife
noticed blood on his forehead. Lucrecio explained that he was stoned, then
went directly to his room and slept. At around 9PM, Lucrecio’s wife and
daughter noticed that his complexion has darkened and foamy substance
was coming out of his mouth. Attempts were made to revive Lucrecio but to
no avail. He died that same night.
After Lucrecio’s burian, NBI Medico-Legal Officer exhumed Lucrecio’s body
and performed the autopsy. Dr. Vertido concluded that Lucrecio’s cause of
death was traumatic head injury.
RTC convicted accused of Homicide. CA affirmed with modifications. In this
appeal, petitioner denied hitting Lucrecio and alleged that the latter died of
cardiac arrest. Petitioner claimed that he suddenly stood up during their
heated argument with the intent to punch Lucrecio. However, since the latter
was seated at the opposite end of the bench, Lucrecio lost his balance and
fell before he could be hit. Lucrecios head hit the improvised stove as a result
of which he lost consciousness.
He also belatedly contends that the delay (1 month after death) in the
autopsy of Lucrecio’s body and its embalming compromised the results
thereof. To substantiate his claim, he quotes the book entitled Legal
Medicine authored by Dr. Pedro Solis.
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner should be held liable for homicide.
RULING: Yes. It is on record that Lucrecio suffered two external
injuries and one internal injury in his head. The autopsy report showed that
Lucrecio died of internal hemorrhage caused by injuries located at the upper
right portion of the head, left side of the center of his head, and a fracture,
linear, right middle fossa, hemorrhage, subdural, right and left cerebral
hemisphere.
15
As affirmed by the appellate court, that petitioner punched Lucrecio twice
causing him to fall to the ground. Melchor categorically testified that petitioner
punched Lucrecio twice and as a result, Lucrecio fell to the ground and lost
consciousness. Melchor would not have testified falsely against petitioner,
who was his nephew.
The notation in the Certificate of Death of Lucrecio that he died of a heart
attack has no weight in evidence. Dr. Corazon Flor, who signed said
document testified that she did not examine the cadaver of Lucrecio. She
stated that a circular governing her profession did not require her to conduct
an examination of Lucrecios corpse, as long as the informant tells her that it
is not a medico-legal case. Renato Sidantes (Renato), the brother-in-law of
Lucrecio who applied for the latters death certificate, had no knowledge of
the real cause of his death. Thus, Dr. Flor was mistakenly informed by
Renato that the cause of Lucrecios death was heart attack.
Petitioners reliance on Dr. Solis’ book is misplaced. Petitioner failed to
adduce evidence that the one month delay in the autopsy indeed modified
the possible findings. He also failed to substantiate his claim that the
embalming fluid rendered the tissue and blood of Lucrecio unfit for toxilogical
analysis. Further, it is settled that courts will only consider as evidence that
which has been formally offered. The allegation that the results of the
autopsy are unworthy of credence was based on a book that was neither
marked for identification nor formally offered in evidence during the hearing
of the case. Thus, the trial court as well as the appellate court correctly
disregarded them.
2. Rabanal vs. People
RolitoRabanal vs. People
G. R. No. 160858 February 28, 2006
Tinga, J.
Facts:
RolitoRabanal, Salvador Impistan and Eloy Labatique were all charged with
homicide for stabbing Felipe Sales with a bladed weapon hitting him on
different parts of hisbody thereby inflicting upon him serious and mortal
wounds which were the direct and immediate cause of hisdeath.
4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES
Dionisio Javier saw Rolito appear from the back of the chapel. Rolito leaned
against the wall and pulled outa knife measuring seven (7) inches in length.
He stabbed the victim with an upward thrust at his right armpit. Javieralso
saw Salvador stab the victim near the chest. The victim retaliated with a
blowto Salvador, who simultaneously stabbed him at the front side of his
body near the chest. Eloy entered the scene andlikewise stabbed the victim.
Javier saw Salvador stab the victim several times until he fell down. Salvador
continued stabbingthe victim several times at the back while he was lying flat
on the floor.
Dr. Florante Mendozaexamined Felipe who was declared dead on arrival. He
testified that the victim suffered several stabwounds on the left upper arm, in
the forearm, and at the back, which "possibly" caused his death.
Dr. DesiderioMoraleda, on the other hand, testified that as per autopsy result,
the cause of the victim’s death was"cardio arrest due to respiratory shock
and hemorrhage secondary to multiple stab wounds." The wounds
totaledtwenty-six (26), twenty-three (23) of which were located in the dorsal
side, chest, forearm and back. He said thatthere was no wound at the right
armpit. Based on his examination of the wounds, he opined that the
assailants hadbeen in motion, although he also said that it was possible that
there could have been only one assailant. However, in the cross-
examination, Javier stated that he only saw Rolito.
The case against Salvador was dismissed while Rolito was convicted.
Petitioner appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeals. In his Brief, he
capitalized on the inconsistency of Javier’s testimony relative to the physical
evidence as shown by the medical and autopsy findings to exculpate himself
from criminal liability. Petitioner claimed that he could not be faulted for the
death of the victim in the absence of credible proof of injury he caused to the
victim.
The appellate court dismissed petitioner’s contention by holding that "[t]he
location of the stab wounds at the cadaver is inconsequential in a homicidal
attack. As long as the intent to kill is present, the requirement of the law for
conviction is satisfied."
Issue: Should Rolito Rabanal be acquitted due to the inconsistencies of
Javier’s testimony and medical report?
Ruling:
16
Yes. The inconsistencies in Javier’s testimony reflect his uncertainty as to the
identity of the malefactors. He was categorical in describing Salvador’s
participation in stabbing the victim during the direct examination and even
earlier inhis sworn statement, only to retract during the cross-examination
and deny having seen Salvador stab the victim. Thisturnaround bears
relevance to the identification of the assailants so as to create a reasonable
doubt as to theirculpability.

Corroborative evidence may be resorted to when there are reasons to

warrant the suspicion that the witnessfalsified the truth or that his
observations had been inaccurate.

Javier had unequivocally testified that petitioner stabbed victim on the right
armpit. This does not correspond withthe autopsy report. Of the twenty-six
(26) stab wounds, not a single wound was found at the right armpit.Physical
evidence is a mute but eloquent manifestation of truth and rates highly in the
hierarchy of trustworthyevidence. It enjoys a far more superior probative
weight than corroborative testimonies. In the instant case, theautopsy report
negates the lone witness’s account of the participation of petitioner in the
stabbing of the victim.The inconsistency between the positive testimony of
Javier and the physical evidence, particularly the autopsyreport, further
diminishes the credibility of the lone eyewitness.

Themedico-legal officer conceded that it was possible that only one person
inflicted all the stab wounds on the victim,thus it is also possible that any one
of the several people mentioned by Javier could have, on his own,
perpetratedthe crime. The gaps and inconsistencies in Javier’s tale give rise
to a plausible alternative version, supported bypetitioner’s witness and
unrebutted by the physical evidence, that petitioner was not present at the
scene of the crime, or otherwise did not participate in the stabbing of the
victim. When confronted with variant though equallyplausible version of
events, the version that is in accord with the acquittal or the least liability of
the accused should be favored.

The lower courts committed reversible error in ruling that the positive
identification of petitioner-appellant by the complainant as the lone
eyewitness presented by the prosecution established his guilt to a moral
certainty. In thiscase, the testimony of Javier is dubious; hence, stark of
probative weight.

4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES 17

4F | LEGMED DIGESTED CASES 18