4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.

:FirstDivision

FIRSTDIVISION
[G.R.No.133025.February17,2000]

PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,plaintiffappellee,vs.RADELGALLARDE,accused
appellant.Rtcspped

DECISION
DAVIDE,JR.,C.J.:

ThisisanappealfromthejudgmentoftheRegionalTrialCourtofTayug,Pangasinan,Branch51,
findingaccusedappellantRadelGallarde[1](hereafterGALLARDE)guiltybeyondreasonabledoubtof
thecrimeofmurderinCriminalCaseNo.T1978andsentencinghimtosufferthepenaltyofreclusion
perpetuaandtopaytheheirsofEdithaTalan(hereafterEDITHA)theamountofP70,000asactual
damages.[2]

On24June1997,GALLARDEwaschargedwiththespecialcomplexcrimeofrapewithhomicidein
aninformationwhoseaccusatoryportionreadsasfollows:

Thatonoraboutthe6thdayofMay1997,intheevening,amidstthefieldlocatedat
Brgy.Trenchera,[M]unicipalityofTayug,[P]rovinceofPangasinan,Philippines,and
withinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,andbymeans
offorce,violenceandintimidation,didthenandtherewilfully,unlawfullyandfeloniously
havesexualintercoursewithoneEDITHATALAN,aminor10yearsofage,againsther
willandconsent,andthereafter,withintenttokill,coverthenoseandmouthofthesaid
minorresultingtoherdeathandthenburyherinthefield,tothedamageandprejudice
oftheheirsofsaidEDITHATALAN.[3]

Duringthearraignmenton1September1997,GALLARDE,withtheassistanceofcounsel,entereda
pleaofnotguilty.[4]Trialofthecaseimmediatelyensuedasthedefensewaivedtheholdingofthepre
trialconference.

ThewitnessespresentedbytheprosecutionwereMarioFernandez,JaimeCabinta,RosyClemente,
FelicisimoMendoza,AlfredoCortez,RenatoFernandez,SPO4OscarB.Lopez,andDr.Perfecto
Tebangin.Therelevantandmaterialfactsestablishedbytheirtestimoniesarefaithfullysummarizedin
theAppelleesBriefasfollows:Korte

IntheeveningofMay26,1997,atthehouseofspousesEduardoandElenaTalanin
Brgy.Trenchea,Tayug,Pangasinan,theirneighborsconverged.Amongthemwere
appellantRadelGallarde,Francisco,Renato,Edwin,allsurnamedFernandez,Romel
Hernandez,JaimeCabinta,RosyClemente,JonTalen,NoelArellagaandRamilBargon.
IdlingbywasEditha,10yearolddaughterofspousesTalan.Afluorescentlamp
illuminatedthemastheypartookbeer(TSNdatedOctober13,1997,pp.34).

Afterawhile,RogerstoodupandinvitedJaimeandappellanttodineinthekitchen.As
theypartookofthemeal,appellantsuddenlyleft.Jaime,too,steppedoutofthekitchen
tourinate.Outsidethehouse,hechanceduponappellantandEdithatalkingtoeach
other.Jaimewhistledatappellantbutinsteadofmindinghim,thelattersprintedtowards
theroadleadingtohishouse(Id.,pp.46).

Thereafter,Edithaenteredthekitchenandtookholdofakerosenelamp.Jaimefollowed
herandaskedwhereshewasgoing.Edithaansweredthatshewouldlookforappellant.
SoonEdithaleftenroutetowhereappellantfled(Id.,pp.78).

By10:00oclockthatevening,thedrinkingbuddieshaddispersedbutJaime,Francisco,
EdwinandRoseregroupedatRenatosplacewheretheytalkedandrelaxed.Moments
later,RogerarrivedandinformedthemthatEdithawasmissing.Rogeraskedthegroup
tohelplookforher(Id.,p.10).

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 1/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

ElenaTalaninformedhisuncle,BarangayExkagawadMarioFernandez,abouther
daughtersdisappearance.Thelatter,togetherwithhissonEdwin,wifeVirginiaand
nephewFreddieCortezwastednotimeinjoiningtheirneighborssearchthehouses,
dikesandfieldstolookforthemissingchild.Thesearchersusedalightedrubbertire
(TSNdatedSept.24,1997,pp.810and24).

WhenJaimementionedthatappellantwasthelastpersonhesawtalkingtoEditha,the
searcherswentbacktothehouseofappellant.About7metersawayfromappellants
house,oneofthesearchers,AlfredoCortez,foundEdithasleftfootslipper(TSNdated
October22,1997,pp.46).Suddenly,EdwinFernandezannounced:"Tata,Radelis
here!"pointingtothetoiletabout6metersawayfromappellantshouse.Thesearchers
foundappellantsquattingwithhisshortpants.Hishandsandkneeswerecoveredwith
soil.WhenconfrontedbyexkagawadHernandezwhyhewasthere,appellantanswered
hewasrelievinghimself(Id.,pp.1116).

AskedwhereEdithawas,appellantreplied:"Idonotknow,Ididnotdoanythingtoher."
Whentold"accordingtoJimmy,youwerewithEditha,"appellantresponded"Ilethergo
andbroughtherbacktothedikeandlethergohome."Tothenextquestion,"wheredid
youcomefromsinceawhileagoyouwerenotyetinthistoilet?"appellantanswered"I
waswithKiko,Iwasasleepintheirhouse.OneofthesearchersMarioBado,gotangry
andcounteredthatappellantsstatementwasimpossiblebecauseKikowaswithhim
drinking(Id.,pp.1620).Sclaw

Aftertheconfrontationatthetoilet,ExkagawadFernandezbroughtappellanttoBrgy.
CaptainFelicisimoMendoza,informingthelatterthatappellantwasthelastpersonseen
talkingwiththemissingchild.Fernandezthenrejoinedthesearchers(Id.,pp.2122).

Backinthefield,VirginiaFernandeztrippedonawetground.Asshereachedforher
slipper,shesawEdithasrightfootslipper(theotheronewasearlierfoundnearthe
houseofappellant)(Id.,pp.2324).

Around3metersfartherfromEdithasrightfootslipperanotherslipperwasfound.Itwas
old,8to9inchesinlengthandappellantwasseenwearingitinthemorningofthatday
(TSNdatedSept.25,1997,pp.25).

Thesearchers,thereafter,noticeddisheveledgrasses.Alongtheway,theysawawide
holeamongthedisheveledgrass.ExkagawadFernandezaccidentallydroppedthe
lightedrubbertireandashisnephewFreddiepickeditup,thelatterexclaimed:"Uncle,
lookatthisloosesoil!"ExkagawadFernandezforthwithscratchedsomeearthaside
andthenEdithashandpittedout.TheFernandezscreamedinterror(Id.,pp.56).

Meantime,BarangayCaptainMendozaheardshoutssaying:"Sheishere,sheisnow
herealreadydead!"Mindfulofappellantssafety,Brgy.CaptainMendozadecidedto
bringappellanttothemunicipalbuilding.Ontheirwaythough,theymetpolicemenon
boardavehicle.Heflaggedthemdownandturnedoverthepersonofappellant,saying:
"Hereisthesuspectinthedisappearanceofthelittlegirl.Sinceyouarealreadyhere,I
amgivinghimtoyou"(TSNdatedOct.21,1997,pp.45).

ThepolicementogetherwithappellantproceededtowherethepeoplefoundEditha.
Oneofthepolicemenshovedmoresoilaside.ThelifelessEdithawascompletelynaked
whenshewasrecovered.(Id.,pp.910).

ThecauseofEdithasdeathasrevealedinthepostmortemexaminationshowed
"suffocationofthelungsasaresultfrompowerfulcoveringofthenoseandmouth,
associatedwithlacerationofthevaginaandrapturedhymen(Exh."T",TSNdatedOct.
23,1997,pp.2223)."[5]Sclex

Ontheotherhand,GALLARDEwasthelonewitnessforthedefense.Heinterposedadenialandthe
alibithathewasathomewithhismotherandbrothersatthetimethecrimeoccurred.Hedeclared
thatheis18yearsold,single,aformerconstructionworker.HeknewEDITHA,aneighborwhomhe
consideredasasisterbecausesheusedtocometohishouse.Theyneverhadaquarrelor
misunderstanding.HeneitherrapednotkilledEditha.[6]

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 2/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

Oncrossexaminationbytheprosecutorandtoquestionspropoundedbythecourt,GALLARDE
admittedthathesawEdithaonthenightof6May1997inherparentshouse,particularlyinthe
kitchen.HewastherebecausehejoinedagroupdrinkingColt45beer,ashewascalledbyRudio
Fernandez.Hedrankandhaddinnerinthekitchen.Afterdinnerhereturnedtothedrinkingplaceand
eventuallywenthomebecausehewasthenalittledrunk.HeknowsKgd.MarioFernandez,butafter
helefttheTalanresidencehedidnotseeKgd.Fernandezanymore.Kgd.Fernandezsawhiminside
his(Gallardes)toiletonthenightofMay6thereafterFernandeztookhimtothebarangaycaptainand
laterhewasturnedovertothePNPatCampNarcisoRamos.Thepoliceinformedhimthathewasa
suspectintherapeandkillingofEdithaTalan,andhetoldthemthathedidnotcommitthecrime.At
theTalanresidencehewaswearingshortpantsandrubberslippers.Fernandezaskedhimatthe
policeheadquarterstopulldownhisshortsandhecomplied.Hewasthenwearingbriefswitha
hemlinethatwasalittleloose.Hewasinformedthatacadaverwasrecoverednearhishouse.When
hewasaskedquestionswhileinpolicecustody,hewasnotrepresentedbyanylawyer.

GALLARDEfurtherdeclaredoncrossexaminationandonquestionsbythecourtthatheconsidered
EdithaTalanasasisterandherparentsalsotreatedhiminafriendlymanner.Whenhecametoknow
thatEdithasparentssuspectedhimofthecrime,hewasstillonfriendlytermswiththem.However,he
didnogotothemtotellthemhewasinnocentbecausetheybrandishedaboloinanger.

Finally,hetestifiedthatintheeveningofMay6hecametoknowthatEdithadied.Shewasstillalive
whenhewasdrinkingatthebackoftheTalanhouseandleftforhome.Fromthetimehearrived,he
neverleftagainthatnight,andhismotherandbrothersknewitforafact.[7]

On12February1998,thetrialcourtrenderedadecisionconvictingGALLARDEofthecrimeof
murderonly,notofthecomplexcrimeofrapewithhomicidebecauseofthelackofproofofcarnal
knowledge.Itobserved:Xlaw

Exh."T"andDr.TebanginstestimonythereonshowthatthelateEdithaTalansustained
slitwoundsinflictedasameansofsuffocatinghertodeath,alacerationofthelower
portionofhervagina,andarupturedhymen.Whatallegedlyoozedfromhervaginawas
blood,coupledwithdirt.Hadtherebeenobservedthepresenceofevenjustadropof
seminalfluidinoraroundhervagina,theCourtwouldreadilyconcludethatthe
lacerationandruptureresultedfromphallicintrusion.Withoutsuchobservation,
however,"carnalknowledge"aselementofrapewouldbeanopenquestion.

Thetrialcourtdidnotappreciatethealternativecircumstanceofintoxicationeitherasamitigatingor
aggravatingcircumstancepursuanttoArticle15oftheRevisedPenalCodebecauseGALLARDEs
allegedinebriationonthenightof6May1997,wasnotsatisfactorilyproven.

Astothecivilaspectofthecase,thetrialcourtconsideredthestipulationofthepartieson27October
1997fixingaliquidatedamountofP70,000asactualdamages,andleavingthematterofmoral
damagestothediscretionofthecourt.Thetrialcourtwasnotinclinedtoawardmoraldamages
becausethe"evidencebeforeittendstodisclosethatonthenightof6May1997,beforeshedied,
Edithawasamuchneglectedchild."

Accordingly,initsdecision[8]of12February1998,thetrialcourtdecreed:

WHEREFORE,hisguilthavingbeenestablishedbeyondareasonabledoubt,theCourt
herebyconvictstheaccusedRADELGALLARDEYHERMOSAofthecrimeof
MURDER,andsentenceshimtosufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetuaandto
indemnifytheheirsofthelateEdithaTalaninthenegotiatedsumofP70,000.00.[9]

Hismotionforreconsideration,[10]havingbeendeniedbythetrialcourtinitsResolution[11]of28
February1998,GALLARDEseasonablyappealedtous.

Weacceptedtheappealon9September1998.

InhisAppellantsBrieffiledon16March1999,GALLARDEallegesthatthetrialcourtcommittedthe
followingerrors:

1.......Inconvicting[him]ofthecrimeofmurderinaninformationforrapewithhomicide.
Xsc

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 3/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

2.......Inconcludingthattheprosecutionhasprovenbeyondreasonabledoubtthat[he]
wasresponsibleforthedeathofEdithaTalan.

3.......Innotacquitting[him]onthegroundofnotchesofproofbeyondreasonabledoubt.
[12]

WesustainGALLARDEscontentionthatthetrialcourterredinconvictinghimofmurderinan
informationcharginghimofrapewithhomicide.Areadingoftheaccusatoryportionoftheinformation
showsthattherewasnoallegationofanyqualifyingcircumstance.Althoughitistruethattheterm
"homicide"asusedinspecialcomplexcrimeofrapewithhomicideistobeunderstoodinitsgeneric
sense,andincludesmurderandslightphysicalinjuriescommittedbyreasonorontheoccasionof
rape,[13]itissettledinthisjurisdictionthatwhereacomplexcrimeischargedandtheevidencefailsto
supportthechargeastooneofthecomponentoffense,theaccusedcanbeconvictedoftheother.[14]
Inrapewithhomicide,inordertobeconvictedofmurderincasetheevidencefailstosupportthe
chargeofrape,thequalifyingcircumstancemustbesufficientlyallegedandproved.Otherwise,it
wouldbeadenialoftherightoftheaccusedtobeinformedofthenatureoftheoffensewithwhichhe
ischarged.[15]Itisfundamentalthateveryelementoftheoffensemustbeallegedinthecomplaintor
information.Themainpurposeofrequiringthevariouselementsofacrimetobesetoutinan
informationistoenabletheaccusedtosuitablypreparehisdefense.Heispresumedtohaveno
independentknowledgeofthefactsthatconstitutetheoffense.[16]

Intheabsencethenintheinformationofanallegationofanyqualifyingcircumstance,GALLARDE
cannotbeconvictedofmurder.Anaccusedcannotbeconvictedofanoffensehigherthanthatwith
whichheischargedinthecomplaintorinformationunderwhichheistried.Itmattersnothow
conclusiveandconvincingtheevidenceofguiltmaybe,butanaccusedcannotbeconvictedofany
offense,unlessitischargedinthecomplaintorinformationforwhichheistried,orisnecessarily
includedinthatwhichischarged.Hehasarighttobeinformedofthenatureoftheoffensewithwhich
heischargedbeforeheisputontrial.Toconvictanaccusedofahigheroffensethanthatchargedin
thecomplaintorinformationunderwhichheistriedwouldbeanunauthorizeddenialofthatright.[17]
Scx

Nevertheless,weagreewiththetrialcourtthattheevidencefortheprosecution,although
circumstantial,wassufficienttoestablishbeyondreasonabledoubttheguiltofGALLARDEforthe
deathofEDITHA.

Directevidenceofthecommissionofacrimeisnottheonlymatrixwherefromatrialcourtmaydraw
itsconclusionandfindingofguilt.[18]Theprosecutionisnotalwaystaskedtopresentdirectevidence
tosustainajudgmentofconvictiontheabsenceofdirectevidencedoesnotnecessarilyabsolvean
accusedfromanycriminalliability.[19]Evenintheabsenceofdirectevidence,convictioncanbehad
onthebasisofcircumstantialevidence,providedthattheestablishedcircumstancesconstitutean
unbrokenchainwhichleadsonetoonefairandreasonableconclusionwhichpointstotheaccused,to
theexclusionofallothers,astheguiltyperson,i.e.,thecircumstancesprovedmustbeconsistentwith
eachother,consistentwiththehypothesisthattheaccusedisguilty,andatthesametimeinconsistent
withanyotherhypothesisexceptthatofguilty.[20]

Therulesonevidenceandprecedentssustaintheconvictionofanaccusedthroughcircumstantial
evidence,aslongasthefollowingrequisitesarepresent:(1)theremustbemorethanone
circumstance(2)theinferencemustbebasedonprovenfactsand(3)thecombinationofall
circumstancesproducesaconvictionbeyonddoubtoftheguiltoftheaccused.[21]

Theimportanceofcircumstantialevidenceismoreapparentintheprosecutionofcasesofrapewith
homicide.Thenatureofthecrimeofrape,whereitisusuallyonlythevictimandtherapistwhoare
presentatthesceneofthecrime,makesprosecutionsforthecomplexcrimeofrapewithhomicide
particularlydifficultsincethevictimcannolongertestifyagainsttheperpetratorofthecrime.Inthese
casespiecesoftheevidenceagainsttheaccusedareusuallycircumstantial.[22]

Thecircumstantialevidenceinthecaseatbar,whenanalyzedandtakentogether,leadstonoother
conclusionthanthatGALLARDE,andnootherelse,killedEDITHAandthatheisguiltytherefor.We
quotewithapprovalthelowercourtsenumerationofthecircumstantialevidenceinthiscase:Scmis

1.Gallarde,18,andEditha,10,wereneighborsandfriends,evenassheusedto
frequenthisplace.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 4/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

2.BothwereattheTalanresidenceonthenightofMay6,1997whileneighbors
indulgedthemselvesinbeer.

3.AmongsaidneighborsCabintasawthemhandinhandbythetoiletsituatedfive(5)
meterseastoftheTalankitchen.

4.AfterCabintawhistledhesawGallarderunhometowardsnorthafterlettinggoof
Edithashands.NeighborClementealsonoticedthatGallardedisappeared,andthat
Edithareturnedtothekitchen.

5.CabintafollowedEdithabacktothekitchen,andsawherholdingakerosenelamp.
Shetoldhimthatshewasgoingtolookfor"Dalpac,"andoffshewentinthesame
directionGallardetook.

6.Gallardeworeshortpantsandrubberslippersatthedrinkingplace.Subsequentlyhe
wasseenwearingshortsinhisowntoilet.

7.Atpast10:00intheeveningduringanintensivesearchforthethenmissingEditha,
herlifelessbodywasfoundinashallowgravesituatedsomedistancebehindGallardes
residence.

8.BeforeEdithasbodywasdiscovered,asearcherfoundagirlsslipper(Exh."B"),56
incheslong,amongthicketssevenmetersawayfromGallardeshouse.

9.Anothersearchersawasecondslipper(Exh."B1"),ofthesamecolorandsizeasthe
firstone.BothslipperswereEdithas,thesearchersrecalled.

10.Athirdrubberslipper(Exh."C")wasthereafterfoundinthefield,nearExh."B1."It
wasanoldslipper,89incheslongandwithaholeattherearend.

11.Soilstucktoeachoneofthethreeslippers.Missc

12.Gallardewasnotathomewhensearcherswenttolookforhimthere,afterCabinta
toldthemthatEdithawaslastseenwithGallarde.

13.WhenGallardewasdiscoveredsquattinginthedarktoiletbehindhishouseand
besidethethickets,hisshortswereupandon.Hishandsandkneesweresoiled.

14.......AtthetoilethewasaskedtheinnocentquestionofwhereEdithawasandhe
answeredrevealingly,thus:"Ididnotdoanythingtoher"and"Ilethergoandbrought
herbacktothedikeandlethergohome."

15.Whenaskedwherehehadbeen,asthetoiletwasfirstseenempty,Gallardesaidhe
waswithKikoandhesleptatthelattershouse,whichanswerMarioBadopromptly
refutedsaying,"VulvaofyourmotherKikowaswithmedrinking."BadoandKikowere
notattheplaceoftheTalansthatnight.

16.Yankedoutofthedarktoiletnearhisownhouse,GallardejoinedKgd.Mario
Fernandezsansprotest.

17.Dr.TebanginfoundonEdithascheekstwoslitwounds,eachbeinganinchaway
fromhernostrils.Bothwoundswerefreshandreddish.

...... FromthelowerportionofEdithasvaginabloodoozed,accompaniedbydirt.

...... Herhymenwasrupturedandwasstillbleeding.

ThemedicolegalconcludedthattheremusthavebeenaforcefulcoveringofEdithas
......
noseandmouthbecauseofthepresenceoftheslitwoundsonbothsidesofherface,
andthatin30secondsunconsciousnessandweakeningresulted,withthevaginal
injuriescontributingtoherdeath.[23]Misspped

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 5/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

Astothecrimeofrape,thereismuchtobedesiredwithrespecttotheprosecutionsevidence
therefor,butnotforthereasonadducedbythetrialcourt,namely,theabsenceofspermatozoain
EDITHAsprivatepartandthereabout.Itiswellsettledthattheabsenceofspermatozoainoraround
thevaginadoesnotnegatethecommissionofrape.[24]Ourdoubtonthecommissionofrapeisbased
onthefactthatthereisatallnoconvincingproofthatthelacerationofthevaginaandtheruptureof
thehymenofEDITHAwerecausedinthecourseofcoitusorbyamaleorgan.Ourmeticulousreading
ofthetestimonyofDr.Tebangindisclosedthathewasneveraskedifthelacerationandtherupture
couldhavebeencausedbythepenisofahumanbeing.Needlesstostate,thesecouldhavebeen
causedbyanyobjectotherthanthepenisofaperson.

WecannotsustainthecontentionofGALLARDEthathewasnotpositivelyidentifiedastheassailant
sincetherewasnoeyewitnesstotheactualcommissionofthecrime.Itdoesnotfollowthatalthough
nobodysawGALLARDEintheactofkillingEDITHA,nobodycanbesaidtohavepositivelyidentified
him.Positiveidentificationpertainsessentiallytoproofofidentityandnotpersetothatofbeingan
eyewitnesstotheveryactofcommissionofthecrime.Therearetwotypesofpositiveidentification.A
witnessmayidentityasuspectoraccusedinacriminalcaseastheperpetratorofthecrimeasan
eyewitnesstotheveryactofthecommissionofthecrime.Thisconstitutesdirectevidence.There
may,however,beinstanceswhere,althoughawitnessmaynothaveactuallyseentheveryactof
commissionofacrime,hemaystillbeabletopositivelyidentifyasuspectoraccusedasthe
perpetratorofacrimeasforinstancewhenthelatteristhepersonoroneofthepersonslastseen
withthevictimimmediatelybeforeandrightafterthecommissionofthecrime.Thisisthesecondtype
ofpositiveidentification,whichformspartofcircumstantialevidence,which,whentakentogetherwith
otherpiecesofevidenceconstitutinganunbrokenchain,leadstoonlyfairandreasonableconclusion,
whichisthattheaccusedistheauthorofthecrimetotheexclusionofallothers.Iftheactual
eyewitnessesaretheonlyonesallowedtopossiblypositivelyidentifyasuspectoraccusedtothe
exclusionofothers,thennobodycaneverbeconvictedunlessthereisaneyewitness,becauseitis
basicandelementarythattherecanbenoconvictionuntilandunlessanaccusedispositively
identified.Suchapropositionisabsolutelyabsurd,becauseitissettledthatdirectevidenceofthe
commissionofacrimeisnottheonlymatrixwherefromatrialcourtmaydrawitsconclusionand
findingofguilt.[25]Ifresorttocircumstantialevidencewouldnotbeallowedtoproveidentityofthe
accusedontheabsenceofdirectevidence,thenfelonswouldgofreeandthecommunitywouldbe
deniedproperprotection.Spped

Asdiscussedabove,thecircumstantialevidenceasestablishedbytheprosecutioninthiscaseand
enumeratedbythetrialcourtpositivelyestablishedtheidentityofGALLARDE,andnooneelse,as
thepersonwhokilledEDITHA.

Wecannotagreewiththetrialcourtsrejectionofthephotographs(Exhibits"I,""J"and"K")takenof
GALLARDEimmediatelyaftertheincidentonthegroundthat"thesameweretakenwhile
[GALLARDE]wasalreadyunderthemercyofthepolice."Thetakingofpicturesofanaccusedeven
withouttheassistanceofcounsel,beingapurelymechanicalact,isnotaviolationofhisconstitutional
rightagainstselfincrimination.

Theconstitutionalrightofanaccusedagainstselfincrimination[26]proscribestheuseofphysicalor
moralcompulsiontoextortcommunicationsfromtheaccusedandnottheinclusionofhisbodyin
evidencewhenitmaybematerial.Purelymechanicalactsarenotincludedintheprohibitionasthe
accuseddoesnottherebyspeakhisguilt,hencetheassistanceandguidinghandofcounselisnot
required.[27]Theessenceoftherightagainstselfincriminationistestimonialcompulsion,thatis,the
givingofevidenceagainsthimselfthroughatestimonialact.[28]Hence,ithasbeenheldthatawoman
chargedwithadulterymaybecompelledtosubmittophysicalexaminationtodetermineher
pregnancy[29]andanaccusedmaybecompelledtosubmittophysicalexaminationandtohavea
substancetakenfromhisbodyformedicaldeterminationastowhetherhewassufferingfrom
gonorrheawhichwascontractedbyhisvictim[30]toexpelmorphinefromhismouth[31]tohavethe
outlineofhisfoottracedtodetermineitsidentitywithbloodyfootprints[32]andtobephotographedor
measured,orhisgarmentsorshoesremovedorreplaced,ortomovehisbodytoenablethe
foregoingthingstobedone.[33]

ThereisalsonomeritinGALLARDEsargumentthatthefailureoftheprosecutiontoprovebeyond
reasonabledoubttheplaceandtimeofthecommissionofthecrimeisfatalandwilljustifyhis
acquittal.Jospped

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 6/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

Theplace,timeanddateofthecommissionoftheoffensearenotessentialelementsofthecrimeof
rapewithhomicide.Thegravamenoftheoffenseisthecarnalknowledgeofawomanandthatonthe
occasionoforasareasonthereof,thecrimeofhomicidewascommitted.Convictionmaybehadon
proofofthecommissionofthecrimeprovideditappearsthatthespecificcrimechargedwasinfact
committedpriortothedateofthefilingofthecomplaintorinformation,withintheperiodofthestatute
oflimitation,andwithinthejurisdictionofthecourt.[34]

Theallegationoftheplaceofcommissionofthecrimeinthecomplaintorinformationissufficientifit
canbeunderstoodtherefromthattheoffensewascommittedorsomeoftheessentialingredients
thereofoccurredatsomeplacewithinthejurisdictionofthecourt.[35]Therulemerelyrequiresthatthe
informationshowsthatthecrimewascommittedwithintheterritorialjurisdictionofthecourt.The
Courtmayeventakejudicialnoticethatsaidplaceiswithinitsjurisdiction.[36]

Astothetimeofthecommissionofthecrime,thephrase"onorabout"employedintheinformation
doesnotrequiretheprosecution"toproveanyprecisedateortime,"butmayproveanydateortime
whichisnotsoremoteastosurpriseandprejudicethedefendant."[37]

ContrarytotheclaimofGALLARDE,theprosecutionwasabletoestablishtheproximatetimeofthe
commissionofthecrime,whichwassometimebetween9:00p.m.,whenGALLARDEleftthehouseof
TalanfollowedbyEDITHA,and10:30p.m.,whenthebodyofEDITHAwasfound.Thiswasfurther
corroboratedbytheexaminingphysicianwhotestified,onthebasisofthedegreeofrigormortis,that
EDITHAdiedmoreorless,at10:00p.m.of6May1997.[38]

Likewise,GALLARDEsalibiandbaredenialdeservenoconsideration.Hedidnotpresentwitnesses
whocouldconfirmhispresenceinhishouse.Nomemberofhisfamilycorroboratedhimonthis
matter.Thedefensesofdenialandalibi,ifunsubstantiatedbyclearandconvincingevidence,are
negativeandselfserving,deservenoweightinlaw,andcannotbegivenevidentiaryvalueoverthe
testimonyofcrediblewitnesseswhotestifyonaffirmativematters.[39]Sppedjo

Moreover,evenassumingthatGALLARDEsclaimistrue,hisstayinhishousedidnotprecludehis
physicalpresenceatthelocuscriminisoritsimmediatevicinity.TheplacewherethebodyofEDITHA
wasfoundburiedwasafewmetersfromhishouse,theplacepointedtointhealibiandcanbe
reachedinashortwhile.Forthedefenseofalibitoprosper,therequirementsoftimeandplacemust
bestrictlymet.Itisnotenoughtoprovethattheaccusedwassomewhereelsewhenthecrimewas
committed,hemustdemonstratethatitwasphysicallyimpossibleforhimtohavebeenatthesceneof
thecrimeatthetimeofitscommission.[40]

Besides,noevilmotivehasbeenestablishedagainstthewitnessesfortheprosecutionthatmight
promptthemtoincriminatetheaccusedorfalselytestifyagainsthim.Itissettledthatwhenthereisno
showingthattheprincipalwitnessesfortheprosecutionwereactuatedbyimpropermotive,the
presumptionisthatthewitnesseswerenotsoactuatedandtheirtestimoniesarethusentitledtofull
faithandcredit.[41]Testimoniesofwitnesseswhohavenomotiveorreasontofalsifyorperjuretheir
testimoniesshouldbegivencredence.[42]

WithrespecttoGALLARDEsclaimthathewasarrestedwithoutwarrant,sufficeittosaythatany
objection,defect,orirregularityattendinganarrestmustbemadebeforetheaccusedentershisplea.
[43]
Therecordsshownoobjectionwaseverinterposedpriortoarraignmentandtrial.[44]GALLARDEs
assertionthathewasdenieddueprocessbyvirtueofhisallegedillegalarrestisnegatedbyhis
voluntarysubmissiontothejurisdictionofthetrialcourt,asmanifestedbythevoluntaryandcounsel
assistedpleaheenteredduringarraignmentandbyhisactiveparticipationinthetrialthereafter.[45]It
issettledthatanyobjectioninvolvingawarrantofarrestorprocedureintheacquisitionbythecourtof
jurisdictionoverthepersonofanaccusedmustbemadebeforeheentershisplea,otherwisethe
objectionisdeemedwaived.[46]Itismuchtoolateinthedaytocomplainaboutthewarrantlessarrest
afteravalidinformationhadbeenfiledandtheaccusedarraignedandtrialcommencedand
completedandajudgmentofconvictionrenderedagainsthim.[47]Verily,theillegalarrestofan
accusedisnotsufficientcauseforsettingasideavalidjudgmentrendereduponasufficientcomplaint
aftertrialfreefromerrorsucharrestdoesnotnegatethevalidityoftheconvictionoftheaccused.[48]
Nexold

Homicide,whichwefindtobetheonlycrimecommittedbyGALLARDE,isdefinedinArticle249of
theRevisedPenalCodeandispunishedwithreclusiontemporal.Intheabsenceofanymodifying

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 7/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision

circumstance,itshallbeimposedinitsmediumperiod.GALLARDEisentitledtothebenefitsofthe
IndeterminateSentenceLaw.Accordingly,hecanbesentencedtosufferanindeterminatepenalty
rangingfromten(10)yearsofthemediumperiodofprisionmayorasminimumtoseventeen(17)
yearsandfour(4)monthsofthemediumperiodofreclusiontemporalasmaximum.

Astothecivilaspectofthecase,thepartiesagreedonP70,000asliquidateddamages.Thisshould
beconstruedasactualdamages.However,asindemnityfordeath,theadditionalsumofP50,000,per
currentcaselaw,shouldbeawarded.

WHEREFORE,theassaileddecisionoftheRegionalTrialCourt,Branch51,Tayug,Pangasinan,in
CriminalCaseNo.T1978findingaccusedappellantRADELGALLARDEguiltyofthecrimeofmurder
isherebymodified.Asmodified,RADELGALLARDEisherebyfoundguiltybeyondreasonabledoubt,
asprincipal,ofthecrimeofHomicide,definedunderArticle249oftheRevisedPenalCode,andis
herebysentencedtosufferanindeterminatepenaltyrangingfromten(10)yearsofthemediumperiod
ofofprisionmayorasminimumtoseventeen(17)yearsandfour(4)monthsofthemediumperiodof
reclusiontemporalasmaximum,andtopaytheheirsofthevictim,EdithaTalan,thesumofP70,000
asliquidatedactualdamagesandP50,000asindemnityforthedeathofEdithaTalan.

CostsagainstaccusedappellantRADELGALLARDEinbothinstances.

SOORDERED.DAVIDE,JR.J

Puno,Kapunan,Pardo,andYnaresSantiago,JJ.,concur.

[1] SpelledGALLARDIintheInformationbutcorrected,uponorderofthetrialcourtmadeinopencourton17December1997when
accusedtoldthecourtthathissurnameisGALLARDE(TSN,17December1997,5)
[2] Rollo,2347.PerJudgeUlyssesRacilesButuyan.
[3] Rollo,12.
[4] OriginalRecord,vol.I(OR1),37.
[5] Rollo,7683.
[6] TSN,17December1997,34.
[7] Rollo,713.
[8] Supranote1.
[9] Rollo,47.
[10] ORI,142144.
[11] Id.,146.
[12] Rollo,57.
[13] SeePeoplev.Penillos,205SCRA546,564(1994)Peoplev.Sequino,264SCRA79,101(1996)
[14] U.S.v.Lahoylahoy,38Phil.330,334(1918)
[15] Peoplev.Pardilla,92SCRA591(1979)
[16] Peoplev.Ramos,296SCRA559,576(1998),citingBalitaanv.CFIofBatangas,etal.,115SCRA729(1982)
[17] Ibid.,citingMatilde,Jr.v.Jabson,etc.,etal.,68SCRA456(1975)
[18] Peoplev.Danao,253SCRA146(1996)
[19] Peoplev.Lopez,G.R.No.131151,25August1999.
[20] Peoplev.Tiozon,198SCRA368(1991)Peoplev.Garcia,215SCRA349(1992)Peoplev.Alvero,224SCRA16(1993)
[21] Section4,Rule133,RulesofCourtPeoplevs.Abrera,283SCRA1(1997)
[22] Peoplev.Cristobal,245SCRA620(1995)
[23] Rollo,4446.
[24] Peoplev.Tismo,204SCRA535[1991]Peoplev.Yabut,G.R.No.133186,28July1999.
[25] Peoplev.Raquino,G.R.No.132480,30September1999.
[26] Section12,ArticleIII,Constitution.
[27] Peoplev.Olvis,etal.,G.R.No.71092,154SCRA513(1987)
[28] Peoplev.Casinillo,213SCRA777(1992)Peoplev.Tranca,235SCRA455(1994)Peoplev.Rondero,G.R.No.125687,9
December1999.
[29] Villaflorv.Summers,41Phil.62(1920)
[30] U.S.v.TanTeng,23Phil.145(1912)
[31] U.S.v.OngSiuHong,36Phil.735(1917)
[32] U.S.v.Salas,25Phil.337(1913)U.S.v.Zara,42Phil.308(1921)
[33] Peoplev.Otadora,etal.,86Phil.244(1950)
[34] Peoplev.Puedan,196SCRA388,393(1991)

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 8/9
4/10/2017 PeoplevsGallarde:133025:February17,2000:C.J.Davide,Jr.:FirstDivision
[35] Sec.10,Rule110oftheRevisedRulesofCourt.
[36] U.S.v.ChuaMo,23Phil.233(1912)
[37] Peoplev.Borromeo,123SCRA253(1983)
[38] TSN,23October1997,2526.
[39] Peoplev.Gayon,269SCRA587(1997)Peoplev.Patalin,etal.,G.R.No.125539,25July1999.
[40] Peoplev.Compendio,258SCRA254,263264(1996)Peoplev.Alshaika,261SCRA637,646(1996)Peoplev.Naguita,etal.,
G.R.No.130091,30August1999.
[41] Peoplev.Hernandez,G.R.No.108027,March4,1999.
[42] Peoplev.Gecomo,254SCRA82(1996)Peoplev.Quilang,G.R.Nos.12326566,12August1999.
[43] Padillav.CourtofAppeals,269SCRA402(1997)
[44] Peoplev.Patalin,etal.,G.R.No.125539,25July1999.
[45] Peoplev.Navarro,297SCRA338(1998)
[46] Peoplev.Lopez,Jr.,245SCRA95(1995)
[47] Peoplev.Llenaresas,248SCRA629(1995)
[48] Peoplev.Cabiles,284SCRA199(1998)

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/133025.htm 9/9