CASE DIGEST

LEGAL MEDICINE

CONTENT

1. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. TIMOTEO TOLENTINO y MAPUA

G.R. No. 70836 October 18, 1988

2. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MARDY AQUINO et.al.,

G.R. No. 203435 April 11, 2018

3. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. EFREN CASTILLO

G.R. No. 186533 August 9, 2010

4. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. BERNIE TEODORO y CAPARAS

G.R. No. 170473 October 12, 2006 [Formerly G.R. No. 146283]

5. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. CONRADO AYUMAN

G.R. No. 133436 April 14, 2004
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs TIMOTEO TOLENTINO y MAPUA
G.R. No. 70836 October 18, 1988

FACTS

Accused was found guilty by the trial court for attacking, assaulting and employing personal violence
upon Alfredo, by then and there throwing at the latter stones hitting him on the head and stabbing the
said victim thereby inflicting upon him serious and mortal wounds which were the direct and immediate
cause of his untimely death.

On his appeal, accused asserted that the trial court erred in finding that the victim was hit at the back of
his head by a stone thrown by the accused. Tolentino also emphasized the trial court erred in not
finding that the victim's wounds at the back of his head was caused by a sharp instrument as borne by
the findings and testimony of the medicolegal expert who performed the autopsy of the body of the
victim. To support the first and second assigned errors, the appellant relies heavily upon the testimony
of the medicolegal officer, Dr. Gregorio Blanco, who performed the autopsy on the body of the victim.
According to the appellant, the finding of the trial court to the effect that the wound located at the back
of the victim's head was caused by a stone is erroneous as the same is not supported or confirmed by
the finding of the medicolegal officer and his expert testimony before the lower court.
ISSUE

Whether or not the guilt of the accused was established beyond reasonable doubt when there is
discrepancy between the testimonies of the expert witness and the lone eyewitness as to the cause of
death of the victim.

RULING

NO.

In the field of medicine, opinions of doctors qualified by training and experience as to causation are
competent and in many cases controlling and binding upon the court. In this case, Dr. Blanco’s opinion
as to the cause of the victim’s injuries should be accorded great respect, it being peculiarly within the
expertise of medical practitioners.

A careful examination of the findings of the medicolegal officer in his necropsy report, particularly on the
wounds found on the victim's head, bolsters the appellant's claim that his guilt has not been proved
beyond reasonable doubt. Wound No. 1, an abrasion, was located above the victims right eyebrow and
therefore, could not have been inflicted by the appellant as Ferrer plainly testified that the appellant was
behind the victim when he threw the stones. The same can be said of Wound no. 3, a contusion located
near the right cheek of the victim. The infliction of the fatal wound, Wound No. 2, a lacerated wound
measuring only 2.5 by 3 cm., located at the back of the victims head cannot likewise be attributed to
appellant as, according to the expert opinion of the doctor who examined the wound, it was caused by
a sharp instrument like a "balisong." While the doctor's testimony on! record does not preclude the
possibility that the wound could have also been caused by a stone, it was incumbent upon the
prosecution, for its case against the accused to succeed, to elicit a positive statement to that effect from
the doctor. But the prosecution absolutely failed in this task.

In fine, the failure of the prosecution to prove that the act of the appellant produced such injury as will
constitute a penal offense is fatal to their case. In criminal cases, the burden of proof as to the offense
charged lies on the prosecution [Rule 131, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Court.] As the accused
has in his favor the constitutional presumption of innocence, the quantum of proof that will warrant a
verdict of guilt must be strong enough to erase any reasonable doubt as to his culpability.

Here, the evidence of the prosecution, far from proving the culpability of the appellant for the crime
charged, discloses several probabilities, some of which point to his innocence.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MARDY AQUINO et.al.,
G.R. No. 203435 April 11, 2018

FACTS

Jackie went to where the accused were having a drinking session to ask them why they attacked his
brothers. Ernesto followed him. Instead of answering, the accused laughed at him. All of a sudden,
Raul Bautista, Aquilino Melendez, and Juanito grabbed and restrained Jackie who was then stabbed by
Mardy and Recto. Ernesto attempted to help his son, but Mario held him by the neck while Felix,
Inyong, Romy, and Bonifacio grabbed his left leg. In that position, Ernesto was stabbed by Mardy and
Recto, hitting him in the left arm, left stomach, and left thigh.

After the incident, the accused ran away leaving behind injured Ernesto and Jackie. The victims were
brought to the hospital, but Jackie died on the way.

In its decision, the RTC found Mardy, Mario, and Juanito guilty of murder and frustrated murder.

In his appeal, the accused claimed that the prosecution failed to prove that Ernesto's wounds would
have certainly resulted in his death were it not for the medical treatment he received. On the contrary,
Dr. Carlito V. Arenas, who attended to Ernesto, testified that the possibility of death from such wounds
is remote

The CA affirmed the conviction of accused-appellants.

ISSUE

Whether or not accused-appellants are guilty of frustrated murder.

RULING

NO.

The charge against accused-appellants must be downgraded to homicide. The elements of frustrated
homicide are: (1) the accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of a deadly weapon in
the assault; (2) the victim sustained fatal or mortal wound/s but did not die because of timely medical
assistance; and (3) none of the qualifying circumstance for murder under Article 248 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, is present. If the victim's wounds are not fatal, the crime is only attempted
homicide.  Thus, the prosecution must establish with certainty the nature, extent, depth, and severity of
the victim's wounds.

In the case at bar, the medicolegal stated that in the first wound, which was found at the thoraco
abdominal area, on exploration during the operation, they found out that the wound was only up to the
intercostals muscle. Meaning to say, it did not penetrate any of the internal organ. Thus, the victim
survive even in the absence of medical treatment. The second injury which was found on the left
thennar which is 4 cm. in length and penetrating the tendons of the hand. Tendons are the structures
which made the fingers move, and there were no vital organs affected. The third injury was about 2.5
cm. in length and affected the quadriceps muscle or the muscles of the thigh and there was a
hematoma but there was no neurovascular involved. The fourth injury on the leg only penetrated the
skins and the fat tissues.

The expert witness further stated infection may follow later on which may cause some sort of blood
poisoning but that was a remote possibility.

And when asked about the possibility of death due to loss of blood for lack of timely medical treatment,
Dr. Arenas answered in negative, explaining that there were no neurovascular injuries in this particular
case. 

Hence, considering that Ernesto's wounds were not fatal and absent a showing that such wounds
would have certainly caused his death were it not for timely medical assistance, the Court declares that
in Criminal Case No. L-6576, accused-appellants' guilt is limited to the crime of attempted homicide.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. EFREN CASTILLO
G.R. No. 186533 August 9, 2010

FACTS

The victim who has mental disability was 18 years old when she was raped by the appellant . She
approached the appellant in order to collect his debt but instead of settling his account, the appellant
took advantage of her. Such awful experience was repeated . , thereafter the girl told her mother what
the appellant did to her.

She was examined by Dr. Antillon-Malimas. Upon examination, Dr. Antillon-Malimas found that the
victim had a 7x6 cm. contusion hematoma lateral aspect of the right buttocks which could have been
caused by a blunt force or violence applied on the area. Based on the appearance of the contusion, it
could have been sustained two days prior to examination and it would exist for a period of four to five
days. Dr. Antillon-Malimas’ findings on the victim’s genitalia, particularly the vulva, revealed no swelling,
no tenderness and no contusion. Her findings on hymen showed healed lacerations at 3 o’clock and 9
o’clock positions which could have been caused by a blunt object or by violence or by reason of sexual
intercourse. An examination on vaginal canal yielded negative result for spermatozoa but another
contusion was found therein. 

The appellant denied having raped the victim. He stated that it was impossible for him to rape her
because during those periods he was harvesting coconuts.

The trial court, convinced on the merits of the prosecution’s case, found the appellant guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.

ISSUE

Whether or not the appeallant is guilty of the crime of rape.

RULING

YES.

In rape cases, the gravamen of the offense is sexual intercourse with a woman against her will or
without her consent. Clearly, carnal knowledge of a woman who is a mental retardate is rape under the
provisions of law. Proof of force or intimidation is not necessary as a mental retardate is not capable of
giving consent to a sexual act. What needs to be proven are the facts of sexual congress between the
accused and the victim, and the mental retardation of the latter.

It is also worth stressing that during victim’s testimony, she positively identified the appellant as the
person who had raped her. Thus, the straightforward narration of the victim of what transpired,
accompanied by her categorical identification of appellant as the malefactor, sealed the case for the
prosecution.The fact of sexual congress between the victim and the appellant was also supported by
the medical findings of healed hymenal lacerations at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock positions which, according
to Dr. Antillon-Malimas, could have resulted from sexual intercourse.

When the victim’s testimony is corroborated by the physician’s finding of penetration, there is sufficient
foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of carnal knowledge. Laceration, whether
healed or fresh, is the best physical evidence of forcible defloration. Thus, the said medical findings,
together with the straightforward testimony of the victim, even strengthen her claim of sexual violation
by appellant.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. BERNIE TEODORO y CAPARAS
G.R. No. 170473 October 12, 2006 [Formerly G.R. No. 146283]

FACTS

As the windows of the room had no screens, the appellant, managed to gain entry into the bedroom,
approach the sleeping 5-year old girl and succeeded in penetrating the child. The child shouted which
awaken her brother who was able to scream and alarmed her mother who recognized the perpetrator.

Thereafter, the victim complained that her private parts were aching. Upon inspection, the mother
noticed that it was swollen and reddish. When asked what appellant did to her, the child relayed the
incident to her aunt and grandmother. She was brought to the hospital the next day.

The medical examination conducted on the victim revealed that her external genitalia and perineum on
the labia majora bore a "bilateral 0.5 cm, LCM abrasion," while on the labia minora, the anterior portion
towards the clitoris had a fresh abrasion about 0.5 cm with minimal bleeding.
Dr. Posadas who examined the child eventually testified on the medical findings. She stated that the
injuries found on the private organ of AAA could have been caused by a man's private organ forced to
penetrate her vagina. The fresh bleeding indicated that the injuries sustained were recent, or at least
not more than three (3) days from the time of the examination.

Appellant denied the accusation and raised the defense of alibi.

The RTC found appellant guilty of rape.

ISSUE

Whether or not the accused is guilty of rape.

RULING

YES.

The victim’s testimony was sufficiently corroborated by the medical findings as testified to by the
medico-legal expert, Dr. Posadas, and the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.

The testimony of Dr. Posadas established the fact that there was contact with the labia which effectively
consummated the crime of rape.

The expert witness testified that a private organ of a man forced the said penis to penetrate/enter the
vagina of victim who is a 5 year old girl, is the cause on [sic] the injuries found. She also found that
there is a fresh bleeding, fresh injuries. It could only be recent, it could be less than 3 days. On cross-
examination, the medico-legal witness confirmed the medical findings that injuries were definitely
sustained in the labia

Thus, the contention of appellant that there were no lacerations in the vagina does not merit any
consideration. In that regard, it has been held that the medical examination of the victim is merely
corroborative in character and is not an element of rape. Likewise, a freshly broken hymen is not an
essential element of rape and healed lacerations do not negate rape.

Appellant challenges the qualifications of Dr. Posadas to testify as an expert witness. While the medical
findings are merely corroborative in character and therefore not indispensable in the successful
prosecution of the crime of rape, nevertheless we sustain the competency of Dr. Posadas. It is
sufficient that the medico-legal witness was able to establish to the satisfaction of the court that she
possessed special knowledge on the question that requires expert opinion, gained through years of
study in medical school, passing the medical board examination and practicing as an O.B. Gyne
resident.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. CONRADO AYUMAN
G.R. No. 133436 April 14, 2004

FACTS

Appellant’s wife rushed her five-year old son to the hospital.  When a nurse, took the child’s vital signs,
it appeared that he was dead on arrival.   The nurse then asked Ermita what happened to the child. 
She answered that he was mauled by his father. The mother admitted that appellant used to hurt the
child every time the latter left the house or made mistake; that before the child died, appellant kicked
him; and that the child informed her he was in pain and vomiting. She stated that appellant maltreated
the boy in order to discipline him and that appellant started to hit him at the age of four.

Dr. Uy of the NBI performed the autopsy on the body of the boy. In his report stated that the cause of
death is Traumatic abdominal injuries. There is pallor, generalized. Rigor mortis, lower extremities.
Livor mortis, generalized, back, buttocks, posterior aspects of the neck and extremities. Areas of post-
mortem greenish discolorations of the abdomen and inferior aspects of the chest are noted.   .”
The trial court found accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide committed by
killing his minor son

In his defense, accused alleged that there is no evidence directly pointing to him as the culprit.   What
the prosecution presented are mere hearsay evidence and “assumption.”

ISSUE

Whether or not in the present case, the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to convict the accused of
the crime.

RULING

YES

All the elements were sufficiently proven by the prosecution, specifically on the basis of circumstantial
evidence.

Dr. Uy who physically examined the victim found abrasions and hematomas all over his body, as well
as lacerated wound of the liver and ruptured intestine, among others.   According to Dr. Uy, the boy died
of “traumatic abdominal injuries.” To a layman, Dr. Uy’s findings readily show that the child suffered
violent blows on his body.

The above circumstance together with other undeniable facts , when viewed in their entirety, are as
convincing as direct evidence and as such, negate appellant’s innocence.  Otherwise stated, the
prosecution established beyond a shadow of doubt, through circumstantial evidence, that appellant
committed the crime of parricide.