P

a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
G.R. No. 172716 November 17, 2010
JASON IVLER y AGUILAR, Petitioner,
vs.
HON. MARIA ROWENA MODESO!SAN "EDRO, J#$%e o& '(e Me'ro)o*+',- r+,*
.o#r', /r,-0( 71, ",1+% .+'y, ,-$ EVANGELINE "ON.E, Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
.AR"IO, J.:
The Case
The petition seeks the review
1
of the Orders
2
of the Regiona Tria Co!rt of Pasig Cit" a#r$ing s!%&sien'io
a ower 'o!rt(s r!ing )nding inappi'a%e the Do!%e *eopard" Ca!se to %ar a se'ond prose'!tion for
Re'kess I$pr!den'e Res!ting in +o$i'ide and Da$age to Propert". This, despite the a''!sed(s previo!s
'onvi'tion for Re'kess I$pr!den'e Res!ting in Sight Ph"si'a In,!ries arising fro$ the sa$e in'ident
gro!nding the se'ond prose'!tion.
The -a'ts
-oowing a vehi'!ar 'oision in .!g!st 2//0, petitioner *ason Iver 1petitioner2 was 'harged %efore the
3etropoitan Tria Co!rt of Pasig Cit", 4ran'h 51 13eTC2, with two separate o6enses7 112 Re'kess
I$pr!den'e Res!ting in Sight Ph"si'a In,!ries 1Cri$ina Case No. 829:52 for in,!ries s!stained %"
respondent Evangeine ;. Pon'e 1respondent Pon'e2< and 122 Re'kess I$pr!den'e Res!ting in +o$i'ide
and Da$age to Propert" 1Cri$ina Case No. 829::2 for the death of respondent Pon'e(s h!s%and Nestor C.
Pon'e and da$age to the spo!ses Pon'e(s vehi'e. Petitioner posted %ai for his te$porar" reease in %oth
'ases.
On 5 Septe$%er 2//0, petitioner peaded g!it" to the 'harge in Cri$ina Case No. 829:5 and was $eted
o!t the penat" of p!%i' 'ens!re. Invoking this 'onvi'tion, petitioner $oved to =!ash the Infor$ation in
Cri$ina Case No. 829:: for pa'ing hi$ in ,eopard" of se'ond p!nish$ent for the sa$e o6ense of re'kess
i$pr!den'e.
The 3eTC ref!sed =!asha, )nding no identit" of o6enses in the two 'ases.
9
.fter !ns!''essf!" seeking re'onsideration, petitioner eevated the $atter to the Regiona Tria Co!rt of
Pasig Cit", 4ran'h 1>5 1RTC2, in a petition for 'ertiorari 1S.C... No. 28/92. 3eanwhie, petitioner so!ght
fro$ the 3eTC the s!spension of pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829::, in'!ding the arraign$ent on 15
3a" 2//>, invoking S.C... No. 28/9 as a pre,!di'ia =!estion. ?itho!t a'ting on petitioner(s $otion, the
3eTC pro'eeded with the arraign$ent and, %e'a!se of petitioner(s a%sen'e, 'an'eed his %ai and ordered
his arrest.
0
Seven da"s ater, the 3eTC iss!ed a reso!tion den"ing petitioner(s $otion to s!spend
pro'eedings and postponing his arraign$ent !nti after his arrest.
>
Petitioner so!ght re'onsideration %!t as
of the )ing of this petition, the $otion re$ained !nresoved.
Re"ing on the arrest order against petitioner, respondent Pon'e so!ght in the RTC the dis$issa of S.C...
No. 28/9 for petitioner(s oss of standing to $aintain the s!it. Petitioner 'ontested the $otion.
The R!ing of the Tria Co!rt
In an Order dated 2 -e%r!ar" 2//:, the RTC dis$issed S.C... No. 28/9, narrow" gro!nding its r!ing on
petitioner(s forfeit!re of standing to $aintain S.C... No. 28/9 arising fro$ the 3eTC(s order to arrest
petitioner for his non&appearan'e at the arraign$ent in Cri$ina Case No. 829::. Th!s, witho!t rea'hing
the $erits of S.C... No. 28/9, the RTC e6e'tive" a#r$ed the 3eTC. Petitioner so!ght re'onsideration %!t
this proved !navaiing.
:
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
+en'e, this petition.
Petitioner denies a%s'onding. +e e@pains that his petition in S.C... No. 28/9 'onstrained hi$ to forego
parti'ipation in the pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829::. Petitioner disting!ishes his 'ase fro$ the ine
of ,!rispr!den'e san'tioning dis$issa of appeas for a%s'onding appeants %e'a!se his appea %efore the
RTC was a spe'ia 'ivi a'tion seeking a pre&tria reief, not a post&tria appea of a ,!dg$ent of 'onvi'tion.
5
Petitioner a$ents the RTC(s fai!re to rea'h the $erits of his petition in S.C... 28/9. Invoking
,!rispr!den'e, petitioner arg!es that his 'onstit!tiona right not to %e pa'ed twi'e in ,eopard" of
p!nish$ent for the sa$e o6ense %ars his prose'!tion in Cri$ina Case No. 829::, having %een previo!s"
'onvi'ted in Cri$ina Case No. 829:5 for the sa$e o6ense of re'kess i$pr!den'e 'harged in Cri$ina
Case No. 829::. Petitioner s!%$its that the $!tipe 'onse=!en'es of s!'h 'ri$e are $ateria on" to
deter$ine his penat".
Respondent Pon'e )nds no reason for the Co!rt to dist!r% the RTC(s de'ision forfeiting petitioner(s
standing to $aintain his petition in S.C... 28/9. On the $erits, respondent Pon'e 'as the Co!rt(s
attention to ,!rispr!den'e hoding that ight o6enses 1e.g. sight ph"si'a in,!ries2 'annot %e 'o$pe@ed
!nder .rti'e 08 of the Revised Pena Code with grave or ess grave feonies 1e.g. ho$i'ide2. +en'e, the
prose'!tion was o%iged to separate the 'harge in Cri$ina Case No. 829:: for the sight ph"si'a in,!ries
fro$ Cri$ina Case No. 829:5 for the ho$i'ide and da$age to propert".
In the Reso!tion of : *!ne 2//5, we granted the O#'e of the Soi'itor Aenera(s $otion not to )e a
'o$$ent to the petition as the p!%i' respondent ,!dge is $ere" a no$ina part" and private respondent
is represented %" 'o!nse.
The Iss!es
Two =!estions are presented for reso!tion7 112 whether petitioner forfeited his standing to seek reief in
S.C... 28/9 when the 3eTC ordered his arrest foowing his non&appearan'e at the arraign$ent in Cri$ina
Case No. 829::< and 122 if in the negative, whether petitioner(s 'onstit!tiona right !nder the Do!%e
*eopard" Ca!se %ars f!rther pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829::.
The R!ing of the Co!rt
?e hod that 112 petitioner(s non&appearan'e at the arraign$ent in Cri$ina Case No. 829:: did not divest
hi$ of personait" to $aintain the petition in S.C... 28/9< and 122 the prote'tion a6orded %" the
Constit!tion shieding petitioner fro$ prose'!tions pa'ing hi$ in ,eopard" of se'ond p!nish$ent for the
sa$e o6ense %ars f!rther pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829::.
Petitioner(s Non&appearan'e at the .rraign$ent in
Cri$ina Case No. 829:: did not Divest hi$ of Standing
to 3aintain the Petition in S.C... 28/9
Dis$issas of appeas gro!nded on the appeant(s es'ape fro$ '!stod" or vioation of the ter$s of his %ai
%ond are governed %" the se'ond paragraph of Se'tion 8, R!e 120,
8
in reation to Se'tion 1, R!e 12>, of
the Revised R!es on Cri$ina Pro'ed!re a!thoriBing this Co!rt or the Co!rt of .ppeas to Caso, !pon
$otion of the appeee or $ot! proprio, dis$iss the appea if the appeant es'apes fro$ prison or
'on)ne$ent, ,!$ps %ai or Dees to a foreign 'o!ntr" d!ring the penden'" of the appea.C The CappeaC
'onte$pated in Se'tion 8 of R!e 120 is a s!it to review ,!dg$ents of 'onvi'tions.
The RTC(s dis$issa of petitioner(s spe'ia 'ivi a'tion for 'ertiorari to review a pre&arraign$ent an'iar"
=!estion on the appi'a%iit" of the D!e Pro'ess Ca!se to %ar pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829:: )nds
no %asis !nder pro'ed!ra r!es and ,!rispr!den'e. The RTC(s reian'e on People v. Esparas
E
!nder'!ts the
'ogen'" of its r!ing %e'a!se Esparas stands for a proposition 'ontrar" to the RTC(s r!ing. There, the Co!rt
granted review to an appea %" an a''!sed who was senten'ed to death for i$porting prohi%ited dr!gs
even tho!gh she ,!$ped %ai pending tria and was th!s tried and 'onvi'ted in a%sentia. The Co!rt in
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
Esparas treated the $andator" review of death senten'es !nder Rep!%i' .'t No. 5:>E as an e@'eption to
Se'tion 8 of R!e 120.
1/
The $is'hief in the RTC(s treat$ent of petitioner(s non&appearan'e at his arraign$ent in Cri$ina Case No.
829:: as proof of his oss of standing %e'o$es $ore evident when one 'onsiders the R!es of Co!rt(s
treat$ent of a defendant who a%sents hi$sef fro$ post&arraign$ent hearings. Fnder Se'tion 21, R!e
110
11
of the Revised R!es of Cri$ina Pro'ed!re, the defendant(s a%sen'e $ere" renders his %onds$an
potentia" ia%e on its %ond 1s!%,e't to 'an'eation sho!d the %onds$an fai to prod!'e the a''!sed
within 9/ da"s2< the defendant retains his standing and, sho!d he fai to s!rrender, wi %e tried in a%sentia
and 'o!d %e 'onvi'ted or a'=!itted. Indeed, the 9/&da" period granted to the %onds$an to prod!'e the
a''!sed !nders'ores the fa't that $ere non&appearan'e does not ipso fa'to 'onvert the a''!sed(s stat!s
to that of a f!gitive witho!t standing.
-!rther, the RTC(s o%servation that petitioner provided Cno e@panation wh" he faied to attend the
s'hed!ed pro'eedingC
12
at the 3eTC is %eied %" the re'ords. Da"s %efore the arraign$ent, petitioner
so!ght the s!spension of the 3eTC(s pro'eedings in Cri$ina Case No. 829:: in ight of his petition with
the RTC in S.C... No. 28/9. -oowing the 3eTC(s ref!sa to defer arraign$ent 1the order for whi'h was
reeased da"s after the 3eTC ordered petitioner(s arrest2, petitioner so!ght re'onsideration. +is $otion
re$ained !nresoved as of the )ing of this petition.
Petitioner(s Convi'tion in Cri$ina Case No. 829:5
4ars his Prose'!tion in Cri$ina Case No. 829::
The a''!sed(s negative 'onstit!tiona right not to %e Ctwi'e p!t in ,eopard" of p!nish$ent for the sa$e
o6enseC
19
prote'ts hi$ fro$, a$ong others, post&'onvi'tion prose'!tion for the sa$e o6ense, with the prior
verdi't rendered %" a 'o!rt of 'o$petent ,!risdi'tion !pon a vaid infor$ation.
10
It is not disp!ted that
petitioner(s 'onvi'tion in Cri$ina Case No. 829:5 was rendered %" a 'o!rt of 'o$petent ,!risdi'tion !pon
a vaid 'harge. Th!s, the 'ase t!rns on the =!estion whether Cri$ina Case No. 829:: and Cri$ina Case
No. 829:5 invove the Csa$e o6ense.C Petitioner adopts the a#r$ative view, s!%$itting that the two
'ases 'on'ern the sa$e o6ense of re'kess i$pr!den'e. The 3eTC r!ed otherwise, )nding that Re'kess
I$pr!den'e Res!ting in Sight Ph"si'a In,!ries is an entire" separate o6ense fro$ Re'kess I$pr!den'e
Res!ting in +o$i'ide and Da$age to Propert" Cas the GatterH re=!ires proof of an additiona fa't whi'h the
other does not.C
1>
?e )nd for petitioner.
Re'kess I$pr!den'e is a Singe Cri$e,
its Conse=!en'es on Persons and
Propert" are 3ateria On" to Deter$ine
the Penat"
The two 'harges against petitioner, arising fro$ the sa$e fa'ts, were prose'!ted !nder the sa$e provision
of the Revised Pena Code, as a$ended, na$e", .rti'e 9:> de)ning and penaiBing =!asi&o6enses. The
te@t of the provision reads7
I$pr!den'e and negigen'e. I .n" person who, %" re'kess i$pr!den'e, sha 'o$$it an" a't whi'h, had
it %een intentiona, wo!d 'onstit!te a grave feon", sha s!6er the penat" of arresto $a"or in its
$a@i$!$ period to prision 'orre''iona in its $edi!$ period< if it wo!d have 'onstit!ted a ess grave
feon", the penat" of arresto $a"or in its $ini$!$ and $edi!$ periods sha %e i$posed< if it wo!d have
'onstit!ted a ight feon", the penat" of arresto $enor in its $a@i$!$ period sha %e i$posed.
.n" person who, %" si$pe i$pr!den'e or negigen'e, sha 'o$$it an a't whi'h wo!d otherwise
'onstit!te a grave feon", sha s!6er the penat" of arresto $a"or in its $edi!$ and $a@i$!$ periods< if
it wo!d have 'onstit!ted a ess serio!s feon", the penat" of arresto $a"or in its $ini$!$ period sha %e
i$posed.
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
?hen the e@e'!tion of the a't 'overed %" this arti'e sha have on" res!ted in da$age to the propert" of
another, the o6ender sha %e p!nished %" a )ne ranging fro$ an a$o!nt e=!a to the va!e of said
da$ages to three ti$es s!'h va!e, %!t whi'h sha in no 'ase %e ess than twent"&)ve pesos.
. )ne not e@'eeding two h!ndred pesos and 'ens!re sha %e i$posed !pon an" person who, %" si$pe
i$pr!den'e or negigen'e, sha 'a!se so$e wrong whi'h, if done $ai'io!s", wo!d have 'onstit!ted a
ight feon".
In the i$position of these penaties, the 'o!rt sha e@er'ise their so!nd dis'retion, witho!t regard to the
r!es pres'ri%ed in .rti'e si@t"&fo!r.
The provisions 'ontained in this arti'e sha not %e appi'a%e7
1. ?hen the penat" provided for the o6ense is e=!a to or ower than those provided in the )rst
two paragraphs of this arti'e, in whi'h 'ase the 'o!rt sha i$pose the penat" ne@t ower in degree
than that whi'h sho!d %e i$posed in the period whi'h the" $a" dee$ proper to app".
2. ?hen, %" i$pr!den'e or negigen'e and with vioation of the .!to$o%ie ;aw, to death of a
person sha %e 'a!sed, in whi'h 'ase the defendant sha %e p!nished %" prision 'orre''iona in its
$edi!$ and $a@i$!$ periods.
Re'kess i$pr!den'e 'onsists in vo!ntar", %!t witho!t $ai'e, doing or faiing to do an a't fro$ whi'h
$ateria da$age res!ts %" reason of ine@'!sa%e a'k of pre'a!tion on the part of the person perfor$ing
or faiing to perfor$ s!'h a't, taking into 'onsideration his e$po"$ent or o''!pation, degree of
inteigen'e, ph"si'a 'ondition and other 'ir'!$stan'es regarding persons, ti$e and pa'e.
Si$pe i$pr!den'e 'onsists in the a'k of pre'a!tion dispa"ed in those 'ases in whi'h the da$age
i$pending to %e 'a!sed is not i$$ediate nor the danger 'ear" $anifest.
The penat" ne@t higher in degree to those provided for in this arti'e sha %e i$posed !pon the o6ender
who fais to end on the spot to the in,!red parties s!'h hep as $a" %e in this hand to give.
Str!'t!ra", these nine paragraphs are 'oapsi%e into fo!r s!%&gro!pings reating to 112 the penaties
atta'hed to the =!asi&o6enses of Ci$pr!den'eC and Cnegigen'eC 1paragraphs 1&22< 122 a $odi)ed penat"
s'he$e for either or %oth =!asi&o6enses 1paragraphs 9&0, : and E2< 192 a generi' r!e for tria 'o!rts in
i$posing penaties 1paragraph >2< and 102 the de)nition of Cre'kess i$pr!den'eC and Csi$pe i$pr!den'eC
1paragraphs 5&82. Con'ept!a", =!asi&o6enses penaiBe Cthe $enta attit!de or 'ondition %ehind the a't,
the dangero!s re'kessness, a'k of 'are or foresight, the i$pr!den'ia p!ni%e,C
1:
!nike wif! o6enses
whi'h p!nish the intentiona 'ri$ina a't. These str!'t!ra and 'on'ept!a feat!res of =!asi&o6enses set
the$ apart fro$ the $ass of intentiona 'ri$es !nder the )rst 19 Tites of 4ook II of the Revised Pena
Code, as a$ended.
Indeed, the notion that =!asi&o6enses, whether re'kess or si$pe, are distin't spe'ies of 'ri$e, separate"
de)ned and penaiBed !nder the fra$ework of o!r pena aws, is nothing new. .s ear" as the $idde of the
ast 'ent!r", we aread" so!ght to %ring 'arit" to this )ed %" re,e'ting in J!iBon v. *!sti'e of the Pea'e of
Pa$panga the proposition that Cre'kess i$pr!den'e is not a 'ri$e in itsef %!t si$p" a wa" of 'o$$itting
it @ @ @C
15
on three points of ana"sis7 112 the o%,e't of p!nish$ent in =!asi&'ri$es 1as opposed to
intentiona 'ri$es2< 122 the egisative intent to treat =!asi&'ri$es as distin't o6enses 1as opposed to
s!%s!$ing the$ !nder the $itigating 'ir'!$stan'e of $ini$a intent2 and< 192 the di6erent penat"
str!'t!res for =!asi&'ri$es and intentiona 'ri$es7
The proposition 1inferred fro$ .rt. 9 of the Revised Pena Code2 that Cre'kess i$pr!den'eC is not a 'ri$e
in itsef %!t si$p" a wa" of 'o$$itting it and $ere" deter$ines a ower degree of 'ri$ina ia%iit" is too
%road to deserve !n=!ai)ed assent. There are 'ri$es that %" their str!'t!re 'annot %e 'o$$itted thro!gh
i$pr!den'e7 $!rder, treason, ro%%er", $ai'io!s $is'hief, et'. In tr!th, 'ri$ina negigen'e in o!r Revised
Pena Code is treated as a $ere =!asi o6ense, and deat with separate" fro$ wif! o6enses. It is not a
$ere =!estion of 'assi)'ation or ter$inoog". In intentiona 'ri$es, the a't itsef is p!nished< in
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
negigen'e or i$pr!den'e, what is prin'ipa" penaiBed is the $enta attit!de or 'ondition %ehind the a't,
the dangero!s re'kessness, a'k of 'are or foresight, the i$pr!den'ia p!ni%e. @ @ @ @
?ere 'ri$ina negigen'e %!t a $odait" in the 'o$$ission of feonies, operating on" to red!'e the
penat" therefor, then it wo!d %e a%sor%ed in the $itigating 'ir'!$stan'es of .rt. 19, spe'ia" the a'k of
intent to 'o$$it so grave a wrong as the one a't!a" 'o$$itted. -!rther$ore, the theor" wo!d re=!ire
that the 'orresponding penat" sho!d %e )@ed in proportion to the penat" pres'ri%ed for ea'h 'ri$e when
'o$$itted wif!". -or ea'h penat" for the wif! o6ense, there wo!d then %e a 'orresponding penat"
for the negigent variet". 4!t instead, o!r Revised Pena Code 1.rt. 9:>2 )@es the penat" for re'kess
i$pr!den'e at arresto $a"or $a@i$!$, to prision 'orre''iona G$edi!$H, if the wif! a't wo!d 'onstit!te
a grave feon", notwithstanding that the penat" for the atter 'o!d range a the wa" fro$ prision $a"or
to death, a''ording to the 'ase. It 'an %e seen that the a't!a penat" for 'ri$ina negigen'e %ears no
reation to the individ!a wif! 'ri$e, %!t is set in reation to a whoe 'ass, or series, of
'ri$es.
18
1E$phasis s!ppied2
This e@pains wh" the te'hni'a" 'orre't wa" to aege =!asi&'ri$es is to state that their 'o$$ission
res!ts in da$age, either to person or propert".
1E
.''ording", we fo!nd the *!sti'e of the Pea'e in J!iBon witho!t ,!risdi'tion to hear a 'ase for CDa$age to
Propert" thro!gh Re'kess I$pr!den'e,C its ,!risdi'tion %eing i$ited to tr"ing 'harges for 3ai'io!s
3is'hief, an intentiona 'ri$e 'on'ept!a" in'o$pati%e with the ee$ent of i$pr!den'e o%taining in
=!asi&'ri$es.
J!iBon, rooted in Spanish aw
2/
1the nor$ative an'estr" of o!r present da" pena 'ode2 and sin'e
repeated" reiterated,
21
stands on soid 'on'ept!a fo!ndation. The 'ontrar" do'trina prono!n'e$ent in
Peope v. -aer
22
that CGrHe'kess i$p!den'e is not a 'ri$e in itsef @ @ @ G%!tH si$p" a wa" of 'o$$itting it
@ @ @,C
29
has ong %een a%andoned when the Co!rt en %an' pro$!gated J!iBon in 1E>> near" two
de'ades after the Co!rt de'ided -aer in 1E9E. J!iBon re,e'ted -aer(s 'on'ept!aiBation of =!asi&'ri$es
%" hoding that =!asi&'ri$es !nder .rti'e 9:> are distin't spe'ies of 'ri$es and not $ere" $ethods of
'o$$itting 'ri$es. -aer fo!nd e@pression in post&J!iBon ,!rispr!den'e
20
on" %" dint of ingering
do'trina 'onf!sion arising fro$ an indis'ri$inate f!sion of 'ri$ina aw r!es de)ning .rti'e 9:> 'ri$es
and the 'o$pe@ing of intentiona 'ri$es !nder .rti'e 08 of the Revised Pena Code whi'h, as wi %e
shown short", rests on erroneo!s 'on'eption of =!asi&'ri$es. Indeed, the J!iBonian 'on'eption of =!asi&
'ri$es !ndergirded a reated %ran'h of ,!rispr!den'e app"ing the Do!%e *eopard" Ca!se to =!asi&
o6enses, %arring se'ond prose'!tions for a =!asi&o6ense aeging one res!ting a't after a prior 'onvi'tion
or a'=!itta of a =!asi&o6ense aeging another res!ting a't %!t arising fro$ the sa$e re'kess a't or
o$ission !pon whi'h the se'ond prose'!tion was %ased.
Prior Convi'tion or .'=!itta of
Re'kess I$pr!den'e 4ars
S!%se=!ent Prose'!tion for the Sa$e
J!asi&O6ense
The do'trine that re'kess i$pr!den'e !nder .rti'e 9:> is a singe =!asi&o6ense %" itsef and not $ere" a
$eans to 'o$$it other 'ri$es s!'h that 'onvi'tion or a'=!itta of s!'h =!asi&o6ense %ars s!%se=!ent
prose'!tion for the sa$e =!asi&o6ense, regardess of its vario!s res!ting a'ts, !ndergirded this Co!rt(s
!n%roken 'hain of ,!rispr!den'e on do!%e ,eopard" as appied to .rti'e 9:> starting with Peope v.
DiaB,
2>
de'ided in 1E>0. There, a f! Co!rt, speaking thro!gh 3r. *!sti'e 3onte$a"or, ordered the
dis$issa of a 'ase for Cda$age to propert" thr! re'kess i$pr!den'eC %e'a!se a prior 'ase against the
sa$e a''!sed for Cre'kess driving,C arising fro$ the sa$e a't !pon whi'h the )rst prose'!tion was %ased,
had %een dis$issed earier. Sin'e then, whenever the sa$e ega =!estion was %ro!ght %efore the Co!rt,
that is, whether prior 'onvi'tion or a'=!itta of re'kess i$pr!den'e %ars s!%se=!ent prose'!tion for the
sa$e =!asi&o6ense, regardess of the 'onse=!en'es aeged for %oth 'harges, the Co!rt !nfaiing" and
'onsistent" answered in the a#r$ative in Peope v. 4ega
2:
1pro$!gated in 1E>5 %" the Co!rt en %an',
per Re"es, *.2, Kap v. ;!tero
25
1pro$!gated in 1E>E, !nreported, per Con'ep'ion, *.2, Peope v.
Narvas
28
1pro$!gated in 1E:/ %" the Co!rt en %an', per 4engBon *.2, Peope v. Siva
2E
1pro$!gated in
1E:2 %" the Co!rt en %an', per Paredes, *.2, Peope v. 3a'a%!ha"
9/
1pro$!gated in 1E:: %" the Co!rt en
%an', per 3akainta, *.2, Peope v. 4!an
91
1pro$!gated in 1E:8 %" the Co!rt en %an', per Re"es, *.4.;.,
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
a'ting C. *.2, 4!erano v. Co!rt of .ppeas
92
1pro$!gated in 1E82 %" the Co!rt en %an', per Reova, *.2, and
Peope v. Cit" Co!rt of 3ania
99
1pro$!gated in 1E89 %" the -irst Division, per Reova, *.2. These 'ases
!nifor$" %arred the se'ond prose'!tions as 'onstit!tiona" i$per$issi%e !nder the Do!%e *eopard"
Ca!se.
The reason for this 'onsistent stan'e of e@tending the 'onstit!tiona prote'tion !nder the Do!%e *eopard"
Ca!se to =!asi&o6enses was %est arti'!ated %" 3r. *!sti'e *.4.;. Re"es in 4!an, where, in %arring a
s!%se=!ent prose'!tion for Cserio!s ph"si'a in,!ries and da$age to propert" thr! re'kess i$pr!den'eC
%e'a!se of the a''!sed(s prior a'=!itta of Csight ph"si'a in,!ries thr! re'kess i$pr!den'e,C with %oth
'harges gro!nded on the sa$e a't, the Co!rt e@pained7
90
Reason and pre'edent %oth 'oin'ide in that on'e 'onvi'ted or a'=!itted of a spe'i)' a't of re'kess
i$pr!den'e, the a''!sed $a" not %e prose'!ted again for that sa$e a't. -or the essen'e of the =!asi
o6ense of 'ri$ina negigen'e !nder arti'e 9:> of the Revised Pena Code ies in the e@e'!tion of an
i$pr!dent or negigent a't that, if intentiona" done, wo!d %e p!nisha%e as a feon". The aw penaiBes
th!s the negigent or 'areess a't, not the res!t thereof. The gravit" of the 'onse=!en'e is on" taken into
a''o!nt to deter$ine the penat", it does not =!aif" the s!%stan'e of the o6ense. .nd, as the 'areess a't
is singe, whether the in,!rio!s res!t sho!d a6e't one person or severa persons, the o6ense 1'ri$ina
negigen'e2 re$ains one and the sa$e, and 'an not %e spit into di6erent 'ri$es and prose'!tions.
9>
@ @ @
1E$phasis s!ppied2
Evident", the DiaB ine of ,!rispr!den'e on do!%e ,eopard" $ere" e@tended to its ogi'a 'on'!sion the
reasoning of J!iBon.
There is in o!r ,!rispr!den'e on" one r!ing going against this !n%roken ine of a!thorit". Pre'eding DiaB
%" $ore than a de'ade, E P!e%o de -iipinas v. Estipona,
9:
de'ided %" the pre&war 'oonia Co!rt in
Nove$%er 1E0/, aowed the s!%se=!ent prose'!tion of an a''!sed for re'kess i$pr!den'e res!ting in
da$age to propert" despite his previo!s 'onvi'tion for $!tipe ph"si'a in,!ries arising fro$ the sa$e
re'kess operation of a $otor vehi'e !pon whi'h the se'ond prose'!tion was %ased. Estipona(s
in'onsisten'" with the post&war DiaB 'hain of ,!rispr!den'e s!#'es to i$pied" overr!e it. .t an" rate, a
do!%ts on this $atter were aid to rest in 1E82 in 4!erano.
95
There, we reviewed the Co!rt of .ppeas(
'onvi'tion of an a''!sed for Cda$age to propert" for re'kess i$pr!den'eC despite his prior 'onvi'tion for
Csight and ess serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thr! re'kess i$pr!den'e,C arising fro$ the sa$e a't !pon whi'h
the se'ond 'harge was %ased. The Co!rt of .ppeas had reied on Estipona. ?e reversed on the strength of
4!an7
98
ThGeH view of the Co!rt of .ppeas was inspired %" the r!ing of this Co!rt in the pre&war 'ase of Peope vs.
Estipona de'ided on Nove$%er 10, 1E0/. +owever, in the 'ase of Peope vs. 4!an, 22 SCR. 1989 13ar'h
2E, 1E:82, this Co!rt, speaking thr! *!sti'e *. 4. ;. Re"es, hed that L
Reason and pre'edent %oth 'oin'ide in that on'e 'onvi'ted or a'=!itted of a spe'i)' a't of re'kess
i$pr!den'e, the a''!sed $a" not %e prose'!ted again for that sa$e a't. -or the essen'e of the =!asi
o6ense of 'ri$ina negigen'e !nder .rti'e 9:> of the Revised Pena Code ies in the e@e'!tion of an
i$pr!dent or negigent a't that, if intentiona" done, wo!d %e p!nisha%e as a feon". The aw penaiBes
th!s the negigent or 'areess a't, not the res!t thereof. The gravit" of the 'onse=!en'e is on" taken into
a''o!nt to deter$ine the penat", it does not =!aif" the s!%stan'e of the o6ense. .nd, as the 'areess a't
is singe, whether the in,!rio!s res!t sho!d a6e't one person or severa persons, the o6ense 1'ri$ina
negigen'e2 re$ains one and the sa$e, and 'an not %e spit into di6erent 'ri$es and prose'!tions.
@ @ @ @
. . . the e@oneration of this appeant, *ose 4!an, %" the *!sti'e of the Pea'e 1now 3!ni'ipa2 Co!rt of
A!ig!into, 4!a'an, of the 'harge of sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e, prevents his
%eing prose'!ted for serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e in the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e of
the provin'e, where %oth 'harges are derived fro$ the 'onse=!en'es of one and the sa$e vehi'!ar
a''ident, %e'a!se the se'ond a''!sation pa'es the appeant in se'ond ,eopard" for the sa$e
o6ense.
9E
1E$phasis s!ppied2
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
Th!s, for a intents and p!rposes, 4!erano had e6e'tive" overr!ed Estipona.
It is noteworth" that the Soi'itor Aenera in 4!erano, in a reversa of his earier stan'e in Siva, ,oined
'a!ses with the a''!sed, a fa't whi'h did not es'ape the Co!rt(s attention7
Then Soi'itor Aenera, now *!sti'e -ei@ M. 3akasiar, in his 3.NI-EST.TION dated De'e$%er 12, 1E:E
1page 82 of the Roo2 ad$its that the Co!rt of .ppeas erred in not s!staining petitioner(s pea of do!%e
,eopard" and s!%$its that Cits a#r$ator" de'ision dated *an!ar" 28, 1E:E, in Cri$ina Case No. />129&CR
)nding petitioner g!it" of da$age to propert" thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e sho!d %e set aside, witho!t
'osts.C +e stressed that Cif do!%e ,eopard" e@ists where the re'kess a't res!ted into ho$i'ide and
ph"si'a in,!ries. then the sa$e 'onse=!en'e $!st perfor'e foow where the sa$e re'kess a't 'a!sed
$ere" da$age to propert"&not death&and ph"si'a in,!ries. Meri", the va!e of a h!$an ife ost as a res!t
of a vehi'!ar 'oision 'annot %e e=!ated with an" a$o!nt of da$ages 'a!sed to a $otors vehi'e arising
fro$ the sa$e $ishap.C
0/
1E$phasis s!ppied2
+en'e, we )nd $erit in petitioner(s s!%$ission that the ower 'o!rts erred in ref!sing to e@tend in his favor
the $ante of prote'tion a6orded %" the Do!%e *eopard" Ca!se. . $ore )tting ,!rispr!den'e 'o!d not %e
taiored to petitioner(s 'ase than Peope v. Siva,
01
a DiaB progen". There, the a''!sed, who was aso
invoved in a vehi'!ar 'oision, was 'harged in two separate Infor$ations with CSight Ph"si'a In,!ries
thr! Re'kess I$pr!den'eC and C+o$i'ide with Serio!s Ph"si'a In,!ries thr! Re'kess I$pr!den'e.C
-oowing his a'=!itta of the for$er, the a''!sed so!ght the =!asha of the atter, invoking the Do!%e
*eopard" Ca!se. The tria 'o!rt initia" denied reief, %!t, on re'onsideration, fo!nd $erit in the a''!sed(s
'ai$ and dis$issed the se'ond 'ase. In a#r$ing the tria 'o!rt, we =!oted with approva its ana"sis of
the iss!e foowing DiaB and its progen" Peope v. 4ega7
02
On *!ne 2:, 1E>E, the ower 'o!rt re'onsidered its Order of 3a" 2, 1E>E and dis$issed the 'ase, hoding7
I
GTHhe Co!rt %eieves that the 'ase fas s=!are" within the do'trine of do!%e ,eopard" en!n'iated in
Peope v. 4ega, @ @ @ In the 'ase 'ited, Ciria'o 4ega and *ose 4ega were 'harged in the *!sti'e of the
Pea'e Co!rt of 3aiipot, .%a", with the 'ri$e of ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e arising
fro$ a 'oision %etween the two a!to$o%ies driven %" the$ 1Cri$. Case No. 882. ?itho!t the aforesaid
'o$paint having %een dis$issed or otherwise disposed of, two other 'ri$ina 'o$paints were )ed in the
sa$e ,!sti'e of the pea'e 'o!rt, in 'onne'tion with the sa$e 'oision one for da$age to propert" thro!gh
re'kess i$pr!den'e 1Cri$. Case No. E>2 signed %" the owner of one of the vehi'es invoved in the
'oision, and another for $!tipe ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e 1Cri$. Case No. E:2 signed
%" the passengers in,!red in the a''ident. 4oth of these two 'o$paints were )ed against *ose 4ega on".
.fter tria, %oth defendants were a'=!itted of the 'harge against the$ in Cri$. Case No. 88. -oowing his
a'=!itta, *ose 4ega $oved to =!ash the 'o$paint for $!tipe ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess
i$pr!den'e )ed against hi$ %" the in,!red passengers, 'ontending that the 'ase was ,!st a d!pi'ation of
the one )ed %" the Chief of Poi'e wherein he had ,!st %een a'=!itted. The $otion to =!ash was denied
and after tria *ose 4ega was 'onvi'ted, where!pon he appeaed to the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e of .%a". In
the $eanti$e, the 'ase for da$age to propert" thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e )ed %" one of the owners of
the vehi'es invoved in the 'oision had %een re$anded to the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e of .%a" after *ose
4ega had waived the se'ond stage of the prei$inar" investigation. .fter s!'h re$and, the Provin'ia
-is'a )ed in the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e two infor$ations against *ose 4ega, one for ph"si'a in,!ries
thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e, and another for da$age to propert" thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e. 4oth
'ases were dis$issed %" the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e, !pon $otion of the defendant *ose 4ega who aeged
do!%e ,eopard" in a $otion to =!ash. On appea %" the Prov. -is'a, the order of dis$issa was a#r$ed %"
the S!pre$e Co!rt in the foowing ang!age7 .
The =!estion for deter$ination is whether the a'=!itta of *ose 4ega in the 'ase )ed %" the 'hief of poi'e
'onstit!tes a %ar to his s!%se=!ent prose'!tion for $!tipe ph"si'a in,!ries and da$age to propert"
thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e.
In the 'ase of PeoGpeH v. -. DiaB, A. R. No. ;&:>18, pro$. 3ar'h 9/, 1E>0, the a''!sed was 'harged in the
$!ni'ipa 'o!rt of Pasa" Cit" with re'kess driving !nder se'. >2 of the Revised 3otor Mehi'e ;aw, for
having driven an a!to$o%ie in a Nfast and re'kess $anner ... there%" 'a!sing an a''ident.( .fter the
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
a''!sed had peaded not g!it" the 'ase was dis$issed in that 'o!rt Nfor fai!re of the Aovern$ent to
prose'!te(. 4!t so$e ti$e thereafter the 'it" attorne" )ed an infor$ation in the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e of
RiBa, 'harging the sa$e a''!sed with da$age to propert" thr! re'kess i$pr!den'e. The a$o!nt of the
da$age was aeged to %e P20E.>/. Peading do!%e ,eopard", the a''!sed )ed a $otion, and on appea
%" the Aovern$ent we a#r$ed the r!ing. .$ong other things we there said thro!gh 3r. *!sti'e
3onte$a"or I
The ne@t =!estion to deter$ine is the reation %etween the )rst o6ense of vioation of the 3otor Mehi'e
;aw prose'!ted %efore the Pasa" Cit" 3!ni'ipa Co!rt and the o6ense of da$age to propert" thr! re'kess
i$pr!den'e 'harged in the RiBa Co!rt of -irst Instan'e. One of the tests of do!%e ,eopard" is whether or
not the se'ond o6ense 'harged ne'essari" in'!des or is ne'essari" in'!ded in the o6ense 'harged in
the for$er 'o$paint or infor$ation 1R!e 119, Se'. E2. .nother test is whether the eviden'e whi'h proves
one wo!d prove the other that is to sa" whether the fa'ts aeged in the )rst 'harge if proven, wo!d have
%een s!#'ient to s!pport the se'ond 'harge and vi'e versa< or whether one 'ri$e is an ingredient of the
other. @ @ @
@ @ @ @
The foregoing ang!age of the S!pre$e Co!rt aso disposes of the 'ontention of the prose'!ting attorne"
that the 'harge for sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e 'o!d not have %een ,oined with
the 'harge for ho$i'ide with serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e in this 'ase, in view of
the provisions of .rt. 08 of the Revised Pena Code, as a$ended. The prose'!tion(s 'ontention $ight %e
tr!e. 4!t neither was the prose'!tion o%iged to )rst prose'!te the a''!sed for sight ph"si'a in,!ries
thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e %efore pressing the $ore serio!s 'harge of ho$i'ide with serio!s ph"si'a
in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e. +aving )rst prose'!ted the defendant for the esser o6ense in the
*!sti'e of the Pea'e Co!rt of 3e"'a!a"an, 4!a'an, whi'h a'=!itted the defendant, the prose'!ting
attorne" is not now in a position to press in this 'ase the $ore serio!s 'harge of ho$i'ide with serio!s
ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e whi'h arose o!t of the sa$e aeged re'kess i$pr!den'e of
whi'h the defendant have %een previo!s" 'eared %" the inferior 'o!rt.
09
Signi)'ant", the Soi'itor Aenera had !rged !s in Siva to ree@a$ine 4ega 1and hen'e, DiaB2 Cfor the
p!rpose of dei$iting or 'arif"ing its appi'ation.C
00
?e de'ined the invitation, th!s7
The State in its appea 'ai$s that the ower 'o!rt erred in dis$issing the 'ase, on the gro!nd of do!%e
,eopard", !pon the %asis of the a'=!itta of the a''!sed in the *P 'o!rt for Sight Ph"si'a In,!ries, thr!
Re'kess I$pr!den'e. In the sa$e %reath said State, thr! the Soi'itor Aenera, ad$its that the fa'ts of the
'ase at %ar, fa s=!are" on the r!ing of the 4ega 'ase @ @ @, !pon whi'h the order of dis$issa of the
ower 'o!rt was an'hored. The Soi'itor Aenera, however, !rges a re&e@a$ination of said r!ing, !pon
'ertain 'onsiderations for the p!rpose of dei$iting or 'arif"ing its appi'ation. ?e )nd, nevertheess, that
f!rther e!'idation or dis=!isition on the r!ing in the 4ega 'ase, the fa'ts of whi'h are anaogo!s or
si$iar to those in the present 'ase, wi "ied no pra'ti'a advantage to the govern$ent. On one hand,
there is nothing whi'h wo!d warrant a dei$itation or 'ari)'ation of the appi'a%iit" of the 4ega 'ase. It
was 'ear. On the other, this Co!rt has reiterated the views e@pressed in the 4ega 'ase, in the identi'a
'ase of Kap v. +on. ;!tero, et'., ;&12::E, .pri 9/, 1E>E.
0>
1E$phasis s!ppied2
.rti'e 08 Does not .pp" to .'ts PenaiBed
Fnder .rti'e 9:> of the Revised Pena Code
The 'onf!sion %edeviing the =!estion posed in this petition, to whi'h the 3eTC s!''!$%ed, ste$s fro$
persistent %!t awkward atte$pts to har$oniBe 'on'ept!a" in'o$pati%e s!%stantive and pro'ed!ra r!es
in 'ri$ina aw, na$e", .rti'e 9:> de)ning and penaiBing =!asi&o6enses and .rti'e 08 on 'o$pe@ing of
'ri$es, %oth !nder the Revised Pena Code. .rti'e 08 is a pro'ed!ra devi'e aowing singe prose'!tion of
$!tipe feonies faing !nder either of two 'ategories7 112 when a singe a't 'onstit!tes two or $ore grave
or ess grave feonies 1th!s e@'!ding fro$ its operation ight feonies
0:
2< and 122 when an o6ense is a
ne'essar" $eans for 'o$$itting the other. The egisat!re 'rafted this pro'ed!ra too to %ene)t the
a''!sed who, in ie! of serving $!tipe penaties, wi on" serve the $a@i$!$ of the penat" for the $ost
serio!s 'ri$e.
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
In 'ontrast, .rti'e 9:> is a s!%stantive r!e penaiBing not an a't de)ned as a feon" %!t Cthe $enta
attit!de @ @ @ %ehind the a't, the dangero!s re'kessness, a'k of 'are or foresight @ @ @,C
05
a singe $enta
attit!de regardess of the res!ting 'onse=!en'es. Th!s, .rti'e 9:> was 'rafted as one =!asi&'ri$e
res!ting in one or $ore 'onse=!en'es.
Ordinari", these two provisions wi operate s$ooth". .rti'e 08 works to 'o$%ine in a singe prose'!tion
$!tipe intentiona 'ri$es faing !nder Tites 1&19, 4ook II of the Revised Pena Code, when proper< .rti'e
9:> governs the prose'!tion of i$pr!dent a'ts and their 'onse=!en'es. +owever, the 'o$pe@ities of
h!$an intera'tion 'an prod!'e a h"%rid =!asi&o6ense not faing !nder either $odes L that of a singe
'ri$ina negigen'e res!ting in $!tipe non&'ri$e da$ages to persons and propert" with var"ing
penaties 'orresponding to ight, ess grave or grave o6enses. The ens!ing prose'!toria die$$a is
o%vio!s7 how sho!d s!'h a =!asi&'ri$e %e prose'!tedO Sho!d .rti'e 08(s fra$ework app" to C'o$pe@C
the singe =!asi&o6ense with its $!tipe 1non&'ri$ina2 'onse=!en'es 1e@'!ding those a$o!nting to ight
o6enses whi'h wi %e tried separate"2O Or sho!d the prose'!tion pro'eed !nder a singe 'harge,
'oe'tive" aeging a the 'onse=!en'es of the singe =!asi&'ri$e, to %e penaiBed separate" foowing
the s'he$e of penaties !nder .rti'e 9:>O
*!rispr!den'e adopts %oth approa'hes. Th!s, one ine of r!ings 1none of whi'h invoved the iss!e of
do!%e ,eopard"2 appied .rti'e 08 %" C'o$pe@ingC one =!asi&'ri$e with its $!tipe
'onse=!en'es
08
!ness one 'onse=!en'e a$o!nts to a ight feon", in whi'h 'ase 'harges were spit %"
gro!ping, on the one hand, res!ting a'ts a$o!nting to grave or ess grave feonies and )ing the 'harge
with the se'ond eve 'o!rts and, on the other hand, res!ting a'ts a$o!nting to ight feonies and )ing
the 'harge with the )rst eve 'o!rts.
0E
E@pe'ted", this is the approa'h the 3eTC i$pied" san'tioned 1and
respondent Pon'e invokes2, even tho!gh !nder Rep!%i' .'t No. 5:E1,
>/
the 3eTC has now e@'!sive
origina ,!risdi'tion to i$pose the $ost serio!s penat" !nder .rti'e 9:> whi'h is prision 'orre''iona in its
$edi!$ period.
Fnder this approa'h, the iss!e of do!%e ,eopard" wi not arise if the C'o$pe@ingC of a'ts penaiBed !nder
.rti'e 9:> invoves on" res!ting a'ts penaiBed as grave or ess grave feonies %e'a!se there wi %e a
singe prose'!tion of a the res!ting a'ts. The iss!e of do!%e ,eopard" arises if one of the res!ting a'ts is
penaiBed as a ight o6ense and the other a'ts are penaiBed as grave or ess grave o6enses, in whi'h 'ase
.rti'e 08 is not dee$ed to app" and the a't penaiBed as a ight o6ense is tried separate" fro$ the
res!ting a'ts penaiBed as grave or ess grave o6enses.
The se'ond ,!rispr!dentia path ni@es .rti'e 08 and san'tions a singe prose'!tion of a the e6e'ts of the
=!asi&'ri$e 'oe'tive" aeged in one 'harge, regardess of their n!$%er or severit",
>1
penaiBing ea'h
'onse=!en'e separate". Th!s, in .ngees v. *ose,
>2
we interpreted paragraph three of .rti'e 9:>, in
reation to a 'harge aeging Cre'kess i$pr!den'e res!ting in da$age to propert" and ess serio!s
ph"si'a in,!ries,C as foows7
GTHhe third paragraph of said arti'e, @ @ @ reads as foows7
?hen the e@e'!tion of the a't 'overed %" this arti'e sha have on" res!ted in da$age to the propert" of
another, the o6ender sha %e p!nished %" a )ne ranging fro$ an a$o!nt e=!a to the va!e of said
da$age to three ti$es s!'h va!e, %!t whi'h sha in no 'ase %e ess than 2> pesos.
The a%ove&=!oted provision si$p" $eans that if there is on" da$age to propert" the a$o!nt )@ed
therein sha %e i$posed, %!t if there are aso ph"si'a in,!ries there sho!d %e an additiona penat" for the
atter. The infor$ation 'annot %e spit into two< one for the ph"si'a in,!ries, and another for the da$age
to propert", @ @ @.
>9
1E$phasis s!ppied2
4" Cadditiona penat",C the Co!rt $eant, ogi'a", the penat" s'he$e !nder .rti'e 9:>.
Evident", these approa'hes, whie parae, are irre'on'ia%e. Coheren'e in this )ed de$ands 'hoosing
one fra$ework over the other. Either 112 we aow the C'o$pe@ingC of a singe =!asi&'ri$e %" %reaking its
res!ting a'ts into separate o6enses 1e@'ept for ight feonies2, th!s re&'on'ept!aiBe a =!asi&'ri$e,
a%andon its present fra$ing !nder .rti'e 9:>, dis'ard its 'on'eption !nder the J!iBon and DiaB ines of
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
'ases, and treat the $!tipe 'onse=!en'es of a =!asi&'ri$e as separate intentiona feonies de)ned !nder
Tites 1&19, 4ook II !nder the pena 'ode< or 122 we for%id the appi'ation of .rti'e 08 in the prose'!tion
and senten'ing of =!asi&'ri$es, re=!ire singe prose'!tion of a the res!ting a'ts regardess of their
n!$%er and severit", separate" penaiBe ea'h as provided in .rti'e 9:>, and th!s $aintain the distin't
'on'ept of =!asi&'ri$es as 'rafted !nder .rti'e 9:>, arti'!ated in J!iBon and appied to do!%e ,eopard"
ad,!di'ation in the DiaB ine of 'ases.1avvphi1
. %e'o$ing regard of this Co!rt(s pa'e in o!r s'he$e of govern$ent den"ing it the power to $ake aws
'onstrains !s to keep invioate the 'on'ept!a distin'tion %etween =!asi&'ri$es and intentiona feonies
!nder o!r pena 'ode. .rti'e 08 is in'ongr!ent to the notion of =!asi&'ri$es !nder .rti'e 9:>. It is
'on'ept!a" i$possi%e for a quasi-ofense to stand for 112 a singe act 'onstit!ting two or $ore grave or
ess grave felonies< or 122 anofense whi'h is a ne'essar" $eans for 'o$$itting another. This is wh", wa"
%a'k in 1E:8 in 4!an, we re,e'ted the Soi'itor Aenera(s arg!$ent that do!%e ,eopard" does not %ar a
se'ond prose'!tion for sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e aeged" %e'a!se the 'harge
for that o6ense 'o!d not %e ,oined with the other 'harge for serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess
i$pr!den'e foowing .rti'e 08 of the Revised Pena Code7
The Soi'itor Aenera stresses in his %rief that the 'harge for sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess
i$pr!den'e 'o!d not %e ,oined with the a''!sation for serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess
i$pr!den'e, %e'a!se .rti'e 08 of the Revised Pena Code aows on" the 'o$pe@ing of grave or ess
grave feonies. This sa$e arg!$ent was 'onsidered and re,e'ted %" this Co!rt in the 'ase of Peope vs.
GSivaH @ @ @7
GTHhe prose'!tion(s 'ontention $ight %e tr!e. 4!t neither was the prose'!tion o%iged to )rst prose'!te
the a''!sed for sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e %efore pressing the $ore serio!s
'harge of ho$i'ide with serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e. +aving )rst prose'!ted the
defendant for the esser o6ense in the *!sti'e of the Pea'e Co!rt of 3e"'a!a"an, 4!a'an, whi'h a'=!itted
the defendant, the prose'!ting attorne" is not now in a position to press in this 'ase the $ore serio!s
'harge of ho$i'ide with serio!s ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e whi'h arose o!t of the sa$e
aeged re'kess i$pr!den'e of whi'h the defendant has %een previo!s" 'eared %" the inferior 'o!rt.
G?He $!st perfor'e r!e that the e@oneration of this appeant @ @ @ %" the *!sti'e of the Pea'e @ @ @ of the
'harge of sight ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e, prevents his %eing prose'!ted for serio!s
ph"si'a in,!ries thro!gh re'kess i$pr!den'e in the Co!rt of -irst Instan'e of the provin'e, where %oth
'harges are derived fro$ the 'onse=!en'es of one and the sa$e vehi'!ar a''ident, %e'a!se the se'ond
a''!sation pa'es the appeant in se'ond ,eopard" for the sa$e o6ense.
>0
1E$phasis s!ppied2
Indeed, this is a 'onstit!tiona" 'o$peed 'hoi'e. 4" prohi%iting the spitting of 'harges !nder .rti'e 9:>,
irrespe'tive of the n!$%er and severit" of the res!ting a'ts, ra$pant o''asions of 'onstit!tiona"
i$per$issi%e se'ond prose'!tions are avoided, not to $ention that s'ar'e state reso!r'es are 'onserved
and diverted to proper !se.
+en'e, we hod that prose'!tions !nder .rti'e 9:> sho!d pro'eed fro$ a singe 'harge regardess of the
n!$%er or severit" of the 'onse=!en'es. In i$posing penaties, the ,!dge wi do no $ore than app" the
penaties !nder .rti'e 9:> for ea'h 'onse=!en'e aeged and proven. In short, there sha %e no spitting
of 'harges !nder .rti'e 9:>, and on" one infor$ation sha %e )ed in the sa$e )rst eve 'o!rt.
>>
O!r r!ing toda" se'!res for the a''!sed fa'ing an .rti'e 9:> 'harge a stronger and si$per prote'tion of
their 'onstit!tiona right !nder the Do!%e *eopard" Ca!se. Tr!e, the" are there%" denied the %ene)'ent
e6e't of the favora%e senten'ing for$!a !nder .rti'e 08, %!t an" disadvantage th!s 'a!sed is $ore
than 'o$pensated %" the 'ertaint" of non&prose'!tion for =!asi&'ri$e e6e'ts =!aif"ing as Cight o6ensesC
1or, as here, for the $ore serio!s 'onse=!en'e prose'!ted %eated"2. If it is so $inded, Congress 'an re&
'raft .rti'e 9:> %" e@tending to =!asi&'ri$es the senten'ing for$!a of .rti'e 08 so that on" the $ost
severe penat" sha %e i$posed !nder a singe prose'!tion of a res!ting a'ts, whether penaiBed as
grave, ess grave or ight o6enses. This wi sti keep inta't the distin't 'on'ept of =!asi&o6enses.
3eanwhie, the enient s'hed!e of penaties !nder .rti'e 9:>, %e)tting 'ri$es o''!p"ing a ower r!ng of
'!pa%iit", sho!d '!shion the e6e't of this r!ing.
P
a
g
e
2
P
a
g
e
2
WHERE2ORE, we GRAN the petition. ?e REVERSE the Orders dated 2 -e%r!ar" 2//: and 2 3a" 2//:
of the Regiona Tria Co!rt of Pasig Cit", 4ran'h 1>5. ?e DISMISS the Infor$ation in Cri$ina Case No.
829:: against petitioner *ason Iver " .g!iar pending with the 3etropoitan Tria Co!rt of Pasig Cit",
4ran'h 51 on the gro!nd of do!%e ,eopard".
;et a 'op" of this r!ing %e served on the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the +o!se of
Representatives.
SO ORDERED.
ANONIO . .AR"IO
.sso'iate *!sti'e
?E CONCFR7
.ON.HIA .AR"IO MORALES
.sso'iate *!sti'e
DIOSDADO M. "ERALA
.sso'iate *!sti'e
RO/ERO A. A/AD
.sso'iate *!sti'e
JOSE .. MENDO3A
.sso'iate *!sti'e
. T T E S T . T I O N
I attest that the 'on'!sions in the a%ove De'ision had %een rea'hed in 'ons!tation %efore the 'ase was
assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Co!rt(s Division.
ANONIO . .AR"IO
.sso'iate *!sti'e
Chairperson
C E R T I - I C . T I O N
P!rs!ant to Se'tion 19, .rti'e MIII of the Constit!tion, and the Division Chairperson(s .ttestation, I 'ertif"
that the 'on'!sions in the a%ove De'ision had %een rea'hed in 'ons!tation %efore the 'ase was assigned
to the writer of the opinion of the Co!rt(s Division.
RENAO .. .ORONA
Chief *!sti'e