Plaintiff-Appellee vs. vs. Accused Accused-Appellants: Special Second Division

SPECIAL SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 229943. July 10, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDGAR ROBLES,

WILFREDO ROBLES, ROLANDO ROBLES alias "Bebot," DANTE ARON
(Deceased), DANILO ROBLES alias "Toto," JOSE ROBLES
(Deceased) , accused,
EDGAR ROBLES and WILFREDO ROBLES , accused-appellants.
RESOLUTION
PERLAS-BERNABE , J : p
In a Resolution 1 dated November 19, 2018, the Court adopted the Decision 2
dated November 29, 2016 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01430
nding accused-appellants Edgar Robles (Edgar) and Wilfredo Robles (accused-
appellants) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder, the pertinent
portion of which reads: HTcADC
WHEREFORE , the Court ADOPTS the ndings of fact and conclusions

of law in the November 29, 2016 Decision of the CA in CA-G.R. HC No. 01430
and AFFIRMS with MODIFICATION said Decision nding accused-appellants
Edgar Robles and Wilfredo Robles GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Murder, de ned and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code. Accordingly, they are each sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, and to solidarily pay the heirs of [Dan Elvie] Sioco the following
amounts: (a) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; (b) P75,000.00 as moral damages;
(c) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages; and (d) P50,000.00 as temperate
damages. Moreover, all monetary awards shall earn interest at the legal rate of
six percent (6%) per annum from the date of nality of this Resolution until full
payment. 3
However, before an Entry of Judgment could be issued in this case, the Court
received a Notice of Death 4 dated January 4, 2019 from accused-appellants' counsel
informing the Court of Edgar's death on December 15, 2018, as evidenced by the
Certificate of Death 5 attached thereto.
As will be explained hereunder, there is a need to modify the Court's Resolution
dated November 19, 2018 dismissing the criminal case insofar as Edgar is concerned.
Under prevailing law and jurisprudence, Edgar's death prior to his nal conviction
by the Court renders dismissible the criminal cases against him. 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
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
death of the offender occurs before final judgment;
xxx xxx xxx
In People v. Culas, 6 the Court thoroughly explained the effects of the death of an
accused pending appeal on his liabilities, as follows: aScITE
From this lengthy disquisition, we summarize our ruling herein:

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 nal 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) xxx
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 ling 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 le 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 [the] provisions of Article 1155
of the Civil Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a possible
privation of right by prescription. 7
Thus, upon Edgar's death prior to his nal conviction, the criminal action against
him is extinguished. Consequently, the civil action instituted therein for the recovery of
the civil liability ex delicto as to him is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the
criminal action. However, it is well to clarify that Edgar's civil liability in connection with
his acts against the victim may be based on sources other than delicts; in which case,
the victim's heirs may le a separate civil action against Edgar's estate, as may be
warranted by law and procedural rules. 8
WHEREFORE , the Court resolves to: (a) MODIFY the Court's Resolution dated
November 19, 2018 in connection with this case, DISMISSING Criminal Case No.
1690-LS before the Regional Trial Court of Surallah, South Cotabato, Branch 26 as
against accused-appellant Edgar Robles by reason of his supervening death prior to his
final conviction; and (b) DECLARE this case CLOSED and TERMINATED as to him. HEITAD
SO ORDERED.
Carpio, * Caguioa, A.B. Reyes, Jr., and J.C. Reyes, Jr., JJ., concur.
Footnotes
* Designated Acting Chief Justice per Special Order No. 2644 dated March 15, 2019.
1. Rollo, pp. 61-62. Signed by Division Clerk of Court Maria Lourdes C. Perfecto.
2. Id. at 3-15. Penned by Associate Justice Edgardo T. Lloren with Associate Justices Rafael
Antonio M. Santos and Ruben Reynaldo G. Roxas, concurring.
3. Id. at 61.
4. Id. at 63.
5. Id. at 64-65.
6. G.R. No. 211166, June 5, 2017, 825 SCRA 552.
7. Id. at 554-555; citations omitted.
8. See id. at 556; citations omitted.

Plaintiff-Appellee vs. vs. Accused Accused-Appellants: Special Second Division

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plaintiff-Appellee vs. vs. Accused Accused-Appellants: Special Second Division

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plaintiff-Appellee vs. vs. Accused Accused-Appellants: Special Second Division

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPECIAL SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 229943. July 10, 2019.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDGAR ROBLES,

EDGAR ROBLES and WILFREDO ROBLES , accused-appellants.

WHEREFORE , the Court ADOPTS the ndings of fact and conclusions

From this lengthy disquisition, we summarize our ruling herein:

6. G.R. No. 211166, June 5, 2017, 825 SCRA 552.

7. Id. at 554-555; citations omitted.

8. See id. at 556; citations omitted.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com

You might also like