People v. Ursal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On October 25, 1970, in Bo. Curva, Libertad, Bogo, Cebu, Aquilina Lepon was hacked and boloed on the head by the appellant, Cristuto Ursal alias Totong Ursal. The incident was witnessed by Maximina Ortega, a 10-year-old girl. Aquilina Lepon ran towards a neighbor's house, Rita Mitante, screaming for help, stating she was being hacked by Totong, before collapsing. Aquilina's husband, Severo Lepon, who was sleeping near the awning of their house, was also attacked but survived. The appellant fled and was arrested on November 2, 1970. The following day, he gave an extrajudicial confession admitting to the killing of Aquilina and assaulting Severo. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Cebu found the accused Cristuto Ursal guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, sentencing him to P12,000.00 fine, without subsidiary imprisonment, and to pay costs. The Petition: The defendant-appellant appealed the decision, alleging that the trial court erred in admitting his confession due to lack of counsel and constitutional rights, and in not rejecting the confession as not all witnesses testified, especially considering the capital penalty involved.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in admitting the accused's supposed confession since he was not duly afforded the right to counsel and other constitutional rights accorded to suspects. Whether the trial court erred in not rejecting the purported confession of the accused as not all the witnesses to it testified, especially considering that this case involved the capital penalty; and whether the testimonies of Maximina Ortega and Rita Mitante were sufficient to sustain the charge against the appellant. Whether the prosecution sufficiently proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of murder, including the presence of treachery and aggravating circumstances of disregard of sex and dwelling, and the appropriate penalty.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of the accused for murder, modifying the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The Court ruled that the extrajudicial confession was admissible as it was obtained before the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution, which has no retroactive effect. The testimonies of the child witness Maximina Ortega and Rita Mitante were found sufficient to sustain the charge, even without the confession. The Court found that the killing was qualified by treachery, but the aggravating circumstances of disregard of sex and dwelling were not present. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua, and the indemnity was affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the admissibility of the extrajudicial confession: The Court held that the appellant's extrajudicial confession, Exhibit "A", was admissible. The confession was obtained on November 3, 1970, prior to the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution on January 17, 1973. Therefore, Section 20, Article IV of the New Constitution, which mandates the right to counsel during custodial investigation, has no retroactive effect. The appellant's claim that the statements in Exhibit "A" were not his own was not given credence, as the details within the confession and the testimony of Maximina Ortega corroborated its voluntary nature. The Court emphasized that the details mentioned in the confession, when corroborated by other evidence, conclusively proved that it was voluntarily made. On the sufficiency of evidence despite alleged confession issues: Even if Exhibit "A" were to be discounted as prosecution evidence, the Court found that the testimonies of Maximina Ortega and Rita Mitante were sufficient to sustain the charge against the appellant. Maximina Ortega, a 10-year-old child, testified that she saw the appellant hacking the victim, Aquilina Lepon, on the head with a bolo. Rita Mitante corroborated this by testifying that she saw Aquilina running towards her house, screaming for help and identifying Totong (the appellant) as the attacker, before she collapsed from her head wounds. The Court found the child's testimony credible, as no motive was disclosed for her to testify falsely against the appellant. The Court also noted that the appellant's flight to Tabogon was a circumstance strongly indicating guilt. On the presence of treachery, aggravating circumstances, and modification of the penalty: The Court ruled that the killing of Aquilina Lepon was qualified by treachery. The attack on the victim was sudden and unexpected. The Court agreed with the Solicitor General that the aggravating circumstances of disregard of sex and dwelling should not be considered. The Court modified the decision of the lower court by finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, without any aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Consequently, the sentence was modified from a fine to reclusion perpetua.
Main Doctrine
The testimony of a child witness, if credible and corroborated, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. An extrajudicial confession obtained before the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution is admissible even without the assistance of counsel, provided it was voluntarily made. The aggravating circumstances of disregard of sex and dwelling are not present when not specifically proven.