PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. CHRISTOPHER MEJARO ROA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

THE FACTS

The facts surrounding the incident, as succinctly put by the RTC, are as follows:

A resident of Brgy. San Miguel, Bula, Camarines Sur, accused [Roa] is known to have suffered mental disorder prior to
his commission of the crime charged. While his uncle, Issac [Mejaro], attributes said condition to an incident in the year
2000 when accused was reportedly struck in the head by some teenagers, SPO1 [Nelson] Ballebar claimed to have
learned from others and the mother of the accused that the ailment is due to his use of illegal drugs when he was working
in Manila. When accused returned from Manila in 2001, Issac recalled that, in marked contrast to the silent and formal
deportment with which he normally associated his nephew, the latter became talkative and was observed to be "always
talking to himself" and "complaining of a headache."

On September 27, 2001, accused had a psychotic episode and was brought to the [Don Susano J. Rodriguez Mental
Hospital] DSJRM by his mother and Mrs. Sombrero. Per the October 10, 2005 certification issued by Dr. Benedicta
Aguirre, accused consulted and underwent treatment for schizophrenia at the [Bicol Medical Center] BMC in the years
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. In her Psychiatric Evaluation Report, Dr. [Edessa Padre-]Laguidao also stated that
accused was prescribed antipsychotic medication which he was, however, not able to continue taking due to financial
constraints. Edgar [Sapinoso] and Rico [Ballebar], who knew accused since childhood, admitted hearing about the latter's
mental health issues and/or his treatment therefor. Throughout the wake of an unnamed aunt sometime in March 2007, it
was likewise disclosed by Issac that accused neither slept nor ate and was known to have walked by himself all the way to
Bagumbayan, Bula.On March 16, 2007, Issac claimed that accused was unusually silent, refused to take a bath and even
quarreled with his mother when prompted to do so. At about 3:30 p.m. of the same day, it appears that Eliseo, then 50
years old, was walking with Edgar on the street in front of the store of Marieta Ballecer at Zone 3, San Miguel, Bula,
Camarines Sur. From a distance of about 3 meters, the pair was spotted by Rico who, while waiting for someone at the
roadd about what he did. Shortly thereafter, SPO1 Hermilando Manzano arrived on board a motorcycle with SPO1
Ballebar who called on accused to surrender. Upon his voluntary surrender and turn over of the jungle knife he was
holding to the police officers, accused was brought to the Bula Municipal Police Station for investigation and detention.
In the meantime, Eliseo was brought to the Bula Municipal Health Center where he was pronounced dead on arrival and,
after the necropsy examination, later certified by Dr. Consolacion to have died of Hypovolemia secondary to multiples
tab wounds.(citations omitted)When arraigned, accused-appellant pleaded "not guilty," but in the certificate of
arraignment, he signed his name as "Amado M. Tetangco." Trial on the merits ensued. There was no contest over the fact
that accused-appellant, indeed, stabbed the victim, but he interposed the defense of insanity
side, also saw accused sitting on the sidecar of a trimobile parked nearby. When Eliseo passed by the trimobile, he was
approached from behind by accused who suddenly stabbed him on the left lower back with a bolo locally known
as ginunting of an approximate length of 8 to 12 inches. Taken aback, Eliseo exclaimed "Tara man, " before falling to the
ground. Chased by both Edgar and Rico and spotted running by Mrs. Sombrero who went out of the Barangay Hall upon
hearing the resultant din, accused immediately fled and took refuge inside the house of his uncle, Camilo Mejaro.

With the incident already attracting people's attention, Barangay Captain Herminion Ballebar called for police assistance
even as Isaac tried to appease Eliseo's relatives. Entering Camilo's house, Issac saw accused who said nothing when
querie

THE RULING OF THE RTC

In its Decision promulgated on September 3, 2013, the RTC of Pili, Camarines Sur found that accused-appellant is guilty of the offense
of Murder. The RTC ruled that the defense of insanity was not sufficiently proven as to exculpate accused-appellant from the offense
charged. The RTC noted that as an exempting circumstance, insanity presupposes that the accused was completely deprived of reason or
discernment and freedom of will at the time of the commission of the crime. Thus, the RTC said, the accused must be shown to be
deprived of reason or that he acted without the least discernment because there is a complete absence of the power to discern, or that
there is a total deprivation of the will. It is the accused who pleads the exempting circumstance of insanity that has the burden of proving
the same with clear and convincing evidence. This entails, the RTC added, opinion testimony which may be given by a witness who has
rational basis to conclude that the accused was insane based on the witness' own perception of the accused, or by a witness who is
qualified as an expert, such as a psychiatrist.

In the case of accused-appellant, the RTC ruled, he failed to discharge the burden of proving the claim of insanity.First, while Isaac
Mejaro's testimony was able to sufficiently prove that accused-appellant started having mental health issues as early as 2001, the trial
court ruled that his past medical history does not suffice to support a finding that he was likewise insane at the time that he perpetrated
the killing of Delmiguez in 2007. To the trial court, the lack of showing of any psychotic incidents from the time of his discharge in
2002 until March 2007 suggests that his insanity is only occasional or intermittent and, thus, precludes the presumption of continuity.
Second, the trial court acknowledged that accused-appellant exhibited abnormal behavior after the incident, particularly in writing the
name of Amado M. Tetangco in his certificate of arraignment. It also noted that midway through the presentation of the prosecution's
evidence, accused-appellant's mental condition worsened, prompting his counsel to file another motion for psychiatric evaluation and
treatment, and that he was subsequently diagnosed again to be suffering from schizophrenia of an undifferentiated type. The trial court,
however, cited the rule that the evidence of insanity after the fact of commission of the offense may be accorded weight only if there is
also proof of abnormal behavior immediately before or simultaneous to the commission of the crime. The trial court then ruled that the
witnesses' account of the incident provides no clue regarding the state of mind of the accused, and all that was established was that he
approached Delmiguez from behind and stabbed him on his lower back. To the trial court, this actuation of the accused, together with his
immediate flight and subsequent surrender to the police authorities, is not indicative of insanity.Finally, while the accused was reputed to
be "crazy" in his community, the trial court ruled that such is of little consequence to his cause. It said:The popular conception of the
word "crazy" is to describe a person or act that is unnatural or out of the ordinary. A man may, therefore, behave in a crazy manner but it
does not necessarily or conclusively prove that he is legally so. The legal standard requires that the accused must be so insane as to be
incapable of entertaining a criminal intent.Hence, the RTC found accused-appellant guilty of the crime of murder, and sentenced him as
follows:WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is rendered finding accused Christopher Mejaro Roa GUILTY beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and imposing upon him the
penalty of reclusion perpetua.Accused is ordered to pay the Heirs of Eliseo Delmiguez the following sums P75,000.00 as civil indemnity
for the death of said victim; P50,000.00 as moral damages; and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages

DECISION

This is an appeal from the Decision promulgated on August 27, 2015, in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 06456, which affirmed
accused-appellant's conviction for the offense of murder, punished under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, by the Regional Trial
Court (RTC), Branch 32, Pili, Camarines Sur, in its Decision in Criminal Case No. P-4100, promulgated on September 3, 2013.
The present case stems from an Information filed against accused-appellant Christopher Mejaro Roa (Roa) on June 5, 2007, charging
him for the murder of Eliseo Delmiguez (Delmiguez), committed as follows:That on or about 16 March 2007 at around 3:30 in the
afternoon at Barangay San Miguel, Municipality of Bula, Province of Camarines Sur, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Court, the above-named accused, with intent to kill and without justifiable cause, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and
feloniously attack, assault, and stab Eliseo Delmiguez with the use of a bladed weapon, locally known as "ginunting," hitting and
injuring the body of the latter, inflicting multiple mortal hack wounds thereon, which were the immediate and direct cause of his
instantaneous death, to the damage and prejudice of the heirs of the victim in such amount that may be proven in court.That the killing
was committed with treachery, as the qualifying circumstance or which qualified the killing to murder, and with taking advantage of
superior strength, as aggravating circumstance.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS JESUS TRINIDAD y BERSAMEN

THE FACTS

On December I2, 20I4, an Information6 was filed before the RTC charging Trinidad with violation of RA I059I, the
pertinent portion of which reads: On or about November 14, 2014, in Pasig City, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the accused, being then a private person, without any lawful authority, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have in [his] possession and under [his] custody and control one ( 1) unit [ c ]aliber .3 8
revolver marked Smith & Wesson with serial number 833268 with markings "RJN", a small arm, loaded with six (6)
pieces live ammunitions of caliber .38 with markings "lRN, 2RN, 3RN, 4RN, 5RN and 6RN", without first securing the
necessary license or permit from the Firearms and Explosives Office of the Philippine National Police, in violation of the
above-entitled law. Contrary to law.7 The prosecution alleged that at around 8:30 in the evening of November 14, 2014,
members from the Philippine National Police (PNP)-Pasig Police Station conducted a buy-bust operation, with Police
Officer (PO) I Randy S. Sanoy (POI Sanoy) as the poseur buyer and POI Rodrigo J. Nidoy, Jr. (POI Nidoy) as the
back-up arresting officer, to apprehend a certain "Jessie" who, purportedly, was involved in illegal drug activities at
Aurelia St., Barangay Bagong Ilog, Pasig City.8 After the alleged sale had been consummated, POI Nidoy arrested
Trinidad, frisked him, and recovered from the latter a 0.38 caliber revolver loaded with six (6) live ammunitions tucked
at his back, as well as a 0.22 caliber rifle loaded with seven (7) live ammunitions and two (2) magazines (subject firearms
and ammunition) which were found beside the gate of his house.9 When asked if he has any documentation for the same,
Trinidad claimed that they were merely pawned to him. After marking the seized items, they proceeded to the nearby
barangay hall and conducted inventory and photography thereof, and then went to the police station where the request for
ballistic examination was made.1° Finally, the seized items were brought to the crime laboratory, where, after
examination, it was revealed that "the firearms are serviceable and the ammunitions are live and serviceable."11 During
trial, Trinidad's counsel agreed to the stipulation that Trinidad has no license to possess or carry firearms of any caliber at
the time of his arrest.

THE RTC RULING

In a Decision16 dated November 7, 2016, the RTC found Trinidad guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two (2) counts of
violation of RA 10591, and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period
of ten (10) years, eight (8) months, and one (1) day, as minimum, to eleven (11) years and four (4) months of prision
mayor, as maximum, for each count. 17 The RTC found that the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of the
crime of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition, considering that: (a) POI Nidoy positively identified the
firearms presented before the court as the same firearms seized and recovered from Trinidad's possession; and ( b)
Trinidad admitted that he is not a holder of any license or permit from the PNP Firearms and Explosives Unit. It gave
credence to the positive, clear, and categorical testimonies of the prosecution's witnesses rather than Trinidad's defenses
of denial and alibi.18 It likewise held that Trinidad's acquittal in the drugs charges is immaterial to this case, opining
that the ground for his acquittal is neither unlawful arrest nor unlawful search and seizure, but the procedural flaw in the
chain of custody of the dangerous drugs.1

DECISION

For his part, Trinidad denied the accusations against him, claiming, among others, that aside from the present case, he was also charged
with the crime of Illegal Sale and Possession of Dangerous Drugs, which arose from the same incident, but was, however, acquitted13
therein for, inter alia, failure of the prosecution to prove that Trinidad was validly arrested thru a legitimate buy-bust operation. He then
formally offered in evidence the said acquittal ruling, which was objected by the public prosecutor for being immaterial and irrelevant to
the present case.14 The RTC admitted said evidence only as part of Trinidad's testimony.
UNICEF: Lowering age of criminal liability 'act of
violence against children'

MANILA - The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) opposed Friday fresh calls to lower the age of criminal liability, saying it is
an act of violence against children.

"Children in conflict with the law are already victims of circumstance, mostly because of poverty and exploitation by adult crime
syndicates," UNICEF representative to the Philippines Lotta Sylwander said in a statement.

Lawmakers, she said, should instead focus on strengthening the implementation of the law to address juvenile delinquency.

"There is a lack of evidence and data that children are responsible for the increase in crime rates committed in the Philippines,"
Sylwander added.

Speaker still wants 9 as minimum age of criminal responsibility

The House Committee on Justice on Monday, Jan. 21, will hold a hearing to repeal Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, which
exempts children 15 years old and younger from criminal liability.

An amendment to the law in 2013, through RA 10630, states that children aged 12 to 15 who were involved in serious crimes shall be
mandatorily placed at the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support Center, which is located within youth facilities called “Bahay
Pag-asa” (House of Hope).

The proposed measure from the House of Representatives seeks to lower criminal responsibility to 9.

 Sotto seeks to lower age of criminal liability to 13

At the upper chamber, Senator Tito Sotto III wants to set the minimum age at 13.

President Rodrigo Duterte had said that he was in favor of repealing the law, saying that discerning teens lose their “sense of
accountability.”

Law enforcers, he said, are dealing with a lot crimes committed by minors.

Duterte backs senators pushing to 'repeal' Pangilinan law

The UNICEF however argued the proposals, saying that a person reaches maturity only at 16 based on scientific studies.

"Proposals to lower the age of criminal responsibility argue that children as young as 9 years old are criminally mature and are already
capable of discernment," Sylwander said.

She added, "If this was the case, then why is the legal age to enter marriage, legal contracts and employment in the Philippines at 18
years old?"

What children in conflict with the law, UNICEF said, is a strong support program and access to social services and child-sensitive justice
system.
 House finalizes bill lowering age of criminal
liability

MANILA -- After months of deliberation, the House Committee on Justice is set to finalize the bill seeking to lower the age of
criminality from 15 to nine years old, the panel’s chair said Thursday.

Oriental Mindoro Rep. Doy Leachon said his panel will be conducting a hearing for the passage of the bills seeking to repeal
Republic Act 9344, or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, next Monday.

RA 9344 exempts children 15 years old and below from criminal liability.

“The Committee, after months of deliberation and consultation with stakeholders and subject matter experts, is now finalizing the
bill hoping that the matter will be passed into law before the end of the 17th Congress,” Leachon said in a statement.

“Recent news and reports show an alarming increase in the number of syndicates using minors to perpetrate criminal acts and it
is but the time to pass this bill to protect our children from being used by ruthless and unscrupulous criminal syndicates to evade
prosecution and punishment,” he added.

The chair of the House Justice Committee said the panel considers the bill a priority matter of legislation in line with the Duterte
Administration's efforts to curb violence and crime as important catalyst to economic growth, enhancement of family values and
national development.

In 2017, President Rodrigo Duterte called on Congress to lower the age of criminal liability “to ensure that the Filipino youth would
accept responsibility for their actions and be subjected to government intervention programs.”

“The current Congress gives utmost importance to legislative measures that ensure the safety of our future generation. The
Committee recognizes that the youth is an integral part of nation-building and the State must ensure and preserve their over-all
wellbeing,” Leachon said.

A similar bill has been filed at the Senate by Senate President Vicente Sotto III on the ground that criminal syndicates exploit the
provisions of the law by using minors in the commission of crimes.

However, Sotto’s bill seeks to lower the age of criminality to 13.

In filing the bill, Sotto cited a study done by the Child Rights International Network which showed that the average minimum age
of criminal responsibility in Asia and Africa is 11, while it is 13 years of age in the United States and Europe.
The Philippine National Police has aired its full support for the bill lowering the age of criminality, citing the presence of juvenile
delinquents who have been deliberately committing grave criminal offenses due to their age because they cannot be jailed and
prosecuted under the present law.
 DATA CENTER COLLEGE OF THE PHILIPPINES
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

RESEARCH ABOUT :

INSANITY AND AGE OF CRIMINAL

LIABILITY
SUBMITTED BY: JAN JOSHUA B. MANUEL
BS CRIM 2-A

SUBMITTED TO: APPLE GUETTENG