People v. Consorte
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Accused-appellant Benjie Consorte y Franco was charged and convicted for the murder of Elizabeth Palmar. The Supreme Court, in a Decision dated July 9, 2014, affirmed the conviction but modified the awards for civil indemnity and exemplary damages, increasing them to P75,000.00 and P30,000.00 respectively, with legal interest. Procedural History: The Court of Appeals (CA) had previously affirmed the conviction on May 27, 2010, in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01806. Following the Supreme Court's affirmation on July 9, 2014, the accused-appellant filed a timely Motion for Reconsideration, arguing that his identification as the perpetrator was incredible and inconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses. The Appeal: While the Motion for Reconsideration was pending resolution, the Officer-in-Charge of the New Bilibid Prison (NBP) submitted a letter dated September 21, 2014, informing the Court that Benjie Consorte y Franco had died on July 14, 2014. A Death Certificate issued by the NBP Medical Officer was attached to the notification. The Court was then tasked to determine the legal effect of this death on the pending appeal and the liabilities of the deceased.
Issue(s)
Whether the death of the accused-appellant while his Motion for Reconsideration was pending resolution extinguishes his criminal liability. Whether the death of the accused-appellant while his Motion for Reconsideration was pending resolution extinguishes his civil liability.
Ruling
The criminal and civil liability ex delicto of accused-appellant Benjie Consorte y Franco are declared EXTINGUISHED by his death prior to final judgment. The judgment of conviction against him is therefore SET ASIDE.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court held that the death of Benjie Consorte y Franco on July 14, 2014, occurred before the judgment of conviction became final because a Motion for Reconsideration was still pending resolution. Applying Article 89(1) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the Court noted that criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the convict as to personal and pecuniary penalties if such death occurs before final judgment. On Issue 2: The Court explicitly relied on the precedent set in People v. Bayotas, which established that the death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates civil liability arising solely from the delict (ex delicto). The rationale is that the civil action for recovery of damages is deemed impliedly instituted with the criminal action, and the extinction of the latter before finality necessarily carries with it the extinction of the former. Therefore, the Court was required to set aside the judgment of conviction and declare all liabilities arising from the alleged crime as extinguished.
Main Doctrine
Pursuant to Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the convict as to personal penalties; as to pecuniary penalties, liability is extinguished only when the death occurs before final judgment. This rule, as clarified in People v. Bayotas, dictates that the death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his criminal liability and only the civil liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed (civil liability ex delicto). Consequently, if an accused dies while a motion for reconsideration is pending before the Supreme Court, the judgment of conviction must be set aside as it has not yet attained finality.