distinguishing right from wrong.

Otherwise, he would not have attempted to escape

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. RANDY BELONIO y LANDAS, appellant. Same; Same; Same; The evidence of insanity after the fact of commission of the
offense may be accorded weight only if there is also proof of alleged abnormal
DECISION behavior immediately before or simultaneous to the commission of the crime.—
Dr. Gauzon testified that based on his interview with Belonio on October 25, 2000
Criminal Law; Exempting Circumstances; Insanity; The moral and legal (around nine months after the stabbing incident) the latter was suffering from
presumption is that one acts with free will and intelligence, and that a felonious schizophrenia. However, the evidence of insanity after the fact of commission of the
or criminal act has been done with deliberate intent, that is, with freedom and offense may be accorded weight only if there is also proof of alleged abnormal
intelligence; Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and avoidance, and behavior immediately before or simultaneous to the commission of the crime.
as such must be adequately proved.—The moral and legal presumption is that one
acts with free will and intelligence, and that a felonious or criminal act has been Same; Same; Same; Witnesses; The time-honored doctrine is that the question of
done with deliberate intent, that is, with freedom and intelligence. Whoever, which witness to believe is one best addressed by the trial court.—The insanity
therefore, invokes insanity as a defense has the burden of proving its existence. issue raised by appellant boils down to the credibility of these two expert witnesses
Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and avoidance, and as such must be and their respective testimonies. The time-honored doctrine is that the question of
adequately proved. The law presumes that all persons are of sound mind, and that which witness to believe is one best addressed by the trial court. The findings of
acts are done consciously. fact of the judges who heard the evidence are accorded great respect and are
seldom disturbed on appeal for they had the opportunity to directly observe the
Same; Same; Same; The testimony or proof of accused’s insanity must relate to witnesses, and to determine by their demeanor on the stand the probative value of
the time preceding or the very moment of the commission of the offense charged. their testimonies. The Court finds no cogent reason to disturb the ruling of the trial
—In the case at bar, the defense utterly failed to discharge its burden of proving court which found Dr. Servando’s testimony more credible.
that appellant was insane. The testimony or proof of appellant’s insanity must
relate to the time preceding or the very moment of the commission of the offense Same; Same; Same; Unlike in other jurisdictions, Philippine courts have
charged. We find the evidence adduced by the defense sorely insufficient to established a more stringent criterion for the acceptance of insanity as an
establish his claim that he was insane at the time he killed Tamayo. exempting circumstance.—Unlike in other jurisdictions, Philippine courts have
established a more stringent criterion for the acceptance of insanity as an
Same; Same; Same; Insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of exempting circumstance. In our jurisdiction, mere abnormality of the mental
intelligence in committing the act.—In the eyes of the law, insanity exists when faculties is not enough; there must be a complete deprivation of intelligence in
there is a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. Proof of the committing the act. Every individual is presumed to have acted with complete grasp
existence of some abnormality of the mental faculties will not exclude imputability, of one’s mental faculties. Appellant’s past does not discredit the facts that (1) he
if it can be shown that the offender was not completely deprived of freedom and did not act with complete absence of the power to discern; (2) he was not deprived
intelligence. As culled from the trial court’s findings, Belonio, after giving the victim of reason; and (3) he was not totally deprived of his will. As held in People vs.
a hard and resentful look, sat near the latter, lighted his cigarette and conversed Madarang, “An accused invoking the insanity defense pleads not guilty by reason
with him. Afterwards, he left and came back armed with a dagger with which he thereof. He admits committing the crime but claims that he is not guilty because he
stabbed Tamayo. Immediately thereafter, he escaped and went into hiding. was insane at the time of its commission. Hence, the accused is tried on the issue of
Contrary to a finding of the existence of insanity, these acts tend to establish that sanity alone and if found to be sane, a judgment of conviction is rendered without
Belonio was well aware of what he had just committed, and was capable of
any trial on the issue of guilt as he had already admitted committing the crime. x x For automatic review before this Court is the Decision 1 of the Regional Trial Court
x.” (RTC) of Negros Occidental (Branch 50 stationed in Bacolod City) in Criminal Case
No. 00-20595, dated February 26, 2001, finding Randy Belonio y Landas guilty
Same; Murder; Aggravating Circumstances; Treachery; Elements.—A review of the beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and sentencing him to death.
records supports the conclusion of the trial court on the presence of treachery,
which qualified the crime to murder. For treachery to be appreciated, two elements The Amended Information dated April 27, 2000, charged appellant with Murder as
must concur: (1) the means of execution employed gave the person attacked no follows:
opportunity to defend himself or retaliate; and (2) the means of execution was
deliberately or consciously adopted. "That on or about the 6th day of January, 2000, in the City of Talisay, Province of
Negros Occidental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
Same; Same; Same; Recidivism; Words and Phrases; A recidivist is one who, at the the above-named accused, armed with an improvised knife, with intent to kill, and
time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by final with treachery and evident premeditation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the Revised Penal Code. and feloniously attack, assault and stab one RAMY TAMAYO, thus causing injuries in
—The aggravating circumstance of recidivism, which was alleged in the Information the vital parts of the body of the latter which caused his instantaneous death.
was also duly proven. “A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, DIECTc
shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced
in the same title of this Code.” The records show that appellant was previously "That accused RANDY BELONIO y LANDAS is a recidivist for having been convicted
convicted by final judgment of Homicide, which like Murder, falls under the title of by final judgment of 4 years, two (2) months, one day to six years in Crim. Case 94-
“Crimes against Persons.” 16609 entitled: People of the Philippines vs. Randy Belonio y Landas for Homicide."

Same; Same; Damages; When actual damages proven by receipts during the trial Upon his arraignment on May 24, 2000, 3 appellant, assisted by his counsel de
amount to less than P25,000, the award of temperate damages for P25,000 is oficio, pleaded not guilty.
justified in lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount.— Actual damages for the
hospital expenses in the amount of P3,627.70 were duly supported by receipts. In his Brief, 4 the Solicitor General narrates the factual antecedents of the case, as
However instead of awarding actual damages, we grant temperate damages in summarized by the trial court, as follows:
accordance with People vs. Andres,where the Court said: “[W]e declared in the case
of People vs. Villanueva that: ‘. . . when actual damages proven by receipts during "Jennifer Carampatana testified that on January 6, 2000, her grandmother was
the trial amount to less than P25,000, as in this case, the award of temperate buried and there was a wake in their house at Brgy. Zone 14 in the evening. Her first
damages for P25,000 is justified in lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount. cousin, the late Ramy Tamayo, also called Ramon Tamayo, arrived in their house at
Conversely, if the amount of actual damages proven exceeds P25,000, then about 10:00 P.M. together with his wife.
temperate damages may no longer be awarded; actual damages based on the
receipts presented during trial should instead be granted.’ “The victim’s heirs "Jennifer invited Ramy to talk outside of their house. Before they could sit on a
should, thus, be awarded temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.” People nearby bench, Ramy decided to buy cigarettes from a store only a few meters away.
vs. Belonio, 429 SCRA 579, G.R. No. 148695 May 27, 2004 The store was furnished with a small opening for the store-keeper to attend to the
customers and Ramy was occupying that space in front of the opening to pay when
PER CURIAM p: the accused Randy Belonio arrived. Randy tried to force his way in front of the
opening and as a consequence, he bumped on Ramy. Jennifer saw that Randy gave
Ramy a long and hard look. In his Brief, 6 Randy Belonio adopted the above findings of the trial court and the
prosecution. However, he raises the defense of insanity, an exempting
"Jennifer said that he and Ramy sat and talked on the bench. The accused came circumstance, and for such purpose, depends on the expert assessment of his
over and sat on the other end of the bench. Then the accused asked Ramy for the witness, Dr. Antonio Gauzon, who certified thus:
latter’s cigarette lighter. The accused asked Ramy from what place did he come
from and why was he there. Ramy answered the accused in a normal manner. "This is an individual who is suffering from (Schizophrenia), Chronic
Undifferentiated and probably triggered by (s)ubstance abuse of Shabu and
"The accused left but after a few minutes he returned, Jennifer, who was facing the Marijuana.
direction of the approaching accused, saw him and noticed that he was wearing
long sleeves. Ramy Tamayo could not see the accused as he was facing sideways to "Recommending treatment and rehabilitation in a mental institution like the
Jennifer. Without saying a word and without warning, the accused delivered a National Center for Mental (H)ealth in Mandaluyong City or treatment in the
stabbing blow with a dagger which was concealed in his hand. Ramy was hit on the psychiatric unit of the Corazon Locsin Montelibano Regional Hospital in Bacolod City
right chest, Jennifer stood up and ran towards her house shouting for help. There at and later rehabilitation in the Negros (O)ccidental Mental Health Center at Paglaum
the gate of the fence of her house, she heard another thudding sound of a stabbing Village, Bacolod City." 7
blow. When Jennifer entered her house, she announced that Ramy was stabbed.
The RTC was convinced beyond reasonable doubt that appellant was guilty of
"Jennifer and her relatives rushed out of the house. Jennifer saw the accused Murder and that he had full control of his mental faculties. It held that the
running away towards the back of the barangay hall. The Tanods who came over testimony of Dr. Ester Regina Servando was more weighty and credible than that of
failed to find the accused. Then when the Barangay Captain and the policemen Dr. Gauzon. 8
arrived, Jennifer informed them of the direction towards which the accused fled.
The accused was arrested from one (1) of the houses near the barangay hall where The trial court convicted appellant, thus:
he took refuge.
"FOR ALL THE FOREGOING, the Court finds the accused Randy Belonio y Landas
"Dr. Raul V. Pama, Jr. was the acting City Health Officer of Talisay City on January 6, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder defined and penalized
2000. He conducted an autopsy on the remains of Ramy Tamayo and listed his under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code as charged in the Information, as
findings in a necropsy report which he prepared. These findings are as follows: Principal by Direct (Participation) with the qualifying aggravating circumstance of
treachery and the special aggravating circumstance of recidivism. There are no
'1. Stabbed wound, 1.7 cm. in length, sutured sharp on one (1) and (inferior portion) other aggravating circumstances nor is there any mitigating circumstance.
and blunt on the other end (superior portion) located at the 4th intercostal space; Accordingly, the accused is sentenced to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH.

'Dr. Pama explained that the wound is just above the left nipple and it penetrated "The accused is held civilly liable to pay the heirs of Randy Tamayo the following
downward hitting the left side on the heart; amounts:

'2. Stabbed wound at the sternal. The wound is situated just above the site of the "1. The sum of P50,000.00 as death indemnity;
first wound.'
"2. The sum of P3,629.70 as reimbursement for hospital expenses;
'The first wound was fatal as it damaged the heart.'" 5
"3. The sum of P940,716.00 as compensatory damages; and
 In the case at bar, the defense utterly failed to discharge its burden of proving that
"4. The sum of P100,000.00 in favor of Mrs. Jinky Tamayo as moral damages." 9 appellant was insane. The testimony or proof of appellant’s insanity must relate to
the time preceding or the very moment of the commission of the offense charged.
Hence this automatic review. 18 We find the evidence adduced by the defense sorely insufficient to establish his
claim that he was insane at the time he killed Tamayo.
In his brief, appellant assigns this lone alleged error of the court a quo for our
consideration: The main circumstances presented by the defense that remotely evinces that
appellant was insane at that time was his act of bumping the victim, without any
"The trial court seriously erred in not appreciating the exempting circumstance of apparent reason, giving him a long hard look, and then eventually stabbing him.
insanity pursuant to Article 12 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended favoring the However, this sequence of events cannot overcome the legal presumption of sanity,
accused-appellant." 10 let alone prove appellant’s insanity.

In support of his appeal, appellant argues that he was not in his right and normal In the eyes of the law, insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of
frame of mind when the killing took place. He avers that no normal person would intelligence in committing the act. Proof of the existence of some abnormality of
ever bump another person, give the latter a hard look and eventually stab him to the mental faculties will not exclude imputability, if it can be shown that the
death. He adds that he and the victim did not know each other at that time. 11 offender was not completely deprived of freedom and intelligence. 19 As culled
from the trial court’s findings, Belonio, after giving the victim a hard and resentful
Appellant also asseverates that Dr. Gauzon is a reliable expert witness and is more look, sat near the latter, lighted his cigarette and conversed with him. 20
knowledgeable and experienced than Dr. Servando. 12 He explains that Dr. Afterwards, he left and came back armed with a dagger with which he stabbed
Servando was once under the tutelage of Dr. Gauzon and that at the time of their Tamayo. Immediately thereafter, he escaped and went into hiding. Contrary to a
respective testimonies, the former was only 37 years old, while the latter was 57 finding of the existence of insanity, these acts tend to establish that Belonio was
years old. 13 Appellant also cites portions of the trial court’s Decision where Dr. well aware of what he had just committed, and was capable of distinguishing right
Gauzon referred him to the Bacolod City Health Office for psychiatric examination. from wrong. Otherwise, he would not have attempted to escape and go into hiding.
The trial court also branded the accused as a homicidal maniac, which appellant
says, is judicial notice of his mental sickness. 14 In sum, he concludes that all of Aside from the "bumping" incident earlier discussed, the only other evidence of
these circumstances show that he was insane at the time of the killing. insanity that appellant could relevantly point to is the medical certificate prepared
by Dr. Antonio Gauzon stating that Belonio was suffering from schizophrenia. This
We find these arguments without merit. witness was presented to refute the findings of the prosecution’s expert witness Dr.
Ester Regina Servando which negated the existence of this mental condition.
The moral and legal presumption is that one acts with free will and intelligence, and
that a felonious or criminal act has been done with deliberate intent, that is, with
freedom and intelligence. 15 Whoever, therefore, invokes insanity as a defense has A run-through of Dr. Gauzon’s testimony strengthens this Court’s resolve to affirm
the burden of proving its existence. the lower court’s findings. Part of his testimony is reproduced as follows:

Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and avoidance, and as such must be "ATTY. JACILDO:
adequately proved. 16 The law presumes that all persons are of sound mind, and
that acts are done consciously. 17 Q. Now, from this Medical Certificate, Doctor, there is specifically mentioned here
that the subject here ‘was found to be incoherent and irrelevant and disoriented as
to time, person and place, and that there was plight of ideas and adjustment, as was not doing what the society expects him to do. So that they have dysfunctional
well as insights.' Will you kindly explain this to this Honorable Court? family and with dysfunctional relatives. So, the value system was really poor. So
that the thinking process of this individual was not developed to what the society
A. What meant there is that, when you talk to the individual, sometimes you get expects him to be. So, it started at that time. So, when he was taking shabu, it
answers right, sometimes it is wrong. That is when you say that he is incoherent. triggered every tissue that the symptoms came out. That’s why, he became
When you say irrelevant, that pertain to the question. Now, as far as dates, he suspicious, (he) became irritable and anybody who would try to not befriend him
could not remember the date. As far (as) the place, he could not recall the place and tried to be angry with him, he would immediately suspect that something
when he was in my office. And some of the persons that were with him, he could would happen to him in which he would react by defending himself, and probably
not identify them. Now, when I say that there was plight of ideas, that (was) when by killing. This individual had, actually, committed, say, killing. I would not say
he was talking. As a matter of fact, I gave an example, when I asked a question — murder because that’s your term, but he had killed already three (3) persons in
when I asked him about the first killing incident and his answer was, ‘face to face different years. So, he does not already know what he was doing because he was
kami, simbahan namon kag inagaw namon ang baril’ because of warship. That is psychotic, which in your parlance is insane.
only one, because there were others that you could not understand what he was
talking about whether you have to rely only on other things. And sometimes, he Q. Now, Doctor, on January 6, 2000, and even prior to this date, what you are trying
would talk on things which are not there. That means he was hallucinating. Now, to say is that, this subject, Randy Belonio, was already suffering from schizophrenia?
judgment is usually poor. Because, when I asked him of what he will do regarding A. Yes." 21
the case, he would just say that, ‘Ti, amo na ya.’ And he said, ‘Ano kamo da ya?’ kay
ang warship. So, I was asking him about the values of what he was doing and he Dr. Gauzon testified that based on his interview with Belonio on October 25, 2000
could not give me that answer. And he does not know what he was doing. That (around nine months after the stabbing incident) the latter was suffering from
means that there was no reality testing. He does not know what is the real fantasy. schizophrenia. However, the evidence of insanity after the fact of commission of the
offense may be accorded weight only if there is also proof of alleged abnormal
xxx xxx xxx behavior immediately before or simultaneous to the commission of the crime. 22

Q. Now in your opinion as an expert in terms of Psychiatry, about how long has the The first set of facts narrated by the doctor relates to Belonio’s condition during the
subject, Randy Belonio, been suffering from his mental disorder that you mentioned interview, months after the incident. His report was silent as regards the incidents
in your Medical Certificate? occurring prior to or during the circumstance for which Belonio stands trial. The
second part of his testimony dwelt on Belonio’s life history, which was offered to
A. Since childhood. If you would notice, I put there in the history that his father was prove that he had been suffering from his alleged condition since childhood.
medically disabled when he was ten (10) years old, and the mother was only a fish
vendor and there were, I think, eight (8) to ten (10) in the family and with a meager However, perusing the story as narrated by the doctor, the same was a mere
income and have to (fend) for themselves. And in a very young age of ten (10), the statement of Belonio’s life and family history, explaining what brought about his
parents had the attitude of ‘Bahala na ang kabata-an'. That means, they have to supposed mental condition. There was no showing that he was actually suffering
take care of themselves. At age 13, he was brought by the relative to Manila, and from schizophrenia during his juvenile years. To demonstrate that he had been
although he was incoherent, you can get from his answer by mentioning so many suffering from this condition, the doctor pointed to the fact that he has already
places, (like) Manila, Pasay, Caloocan, Novaliches, MRT, Cubao. That means, at age killed three (3) persons, including the present incident. However, such conclusion is
13, he was already around these areas (f)ending for himself. And the (s)treet non sequitur and, at best, a circuitous argument. Further, the veracity of these
(u)rchins, you know for a fact, that they are influenced by drugs. So, by that time, findings is belied by the fact that the accused did not raise this defense during his
with that dysfunctional family, and without any family to take care of himself, he
prosecutions for the other killings. No other circumstances evincing its existence A. Yes.
were presented during trial.
Q. Because there was an intention to be manipulative and there was an intention to
Furthermore, Dr. Gauzon’s examination cannot surmount Dr. Servando’s punctilious be evasive because he was suspicious?
and overwhelming analysis, which took two days to narrate. She explained the A. Yes.
history of the accused, including his family and medical background, conducted a
mental status examination, which was based on her direct interviews with him, and Q. When you said that there was no psychotic features(,) . . . (w)hat does this
gave a series of other written psychological examinations. 23 mean?
A. When you say psychosis, those are compose[d] of symptoms such as delusion
The portion of Dr. Servando’s testimony pertinent to her findings regarding and hallucination that are being extracted from the patient or being displayed by
Belonio’s mental condition is quoted as follows: the patient. However, during the examination, the symptom or the patient’s
answers are not enough to put him to a criteria of psychosis because the delusion
"FISCAL AGRAVIADOR: and the hallucination as well as the thought process, the thought contents must be
concretized enough in order for us to determine to diagnose that this patient is
Q. Can you please read for the record this (r)esult which consist only of one (1) actually suffering from psychosis.
sentence?
A. Psychiatric Evaluation Result. Base(d) on history, mental status examination, and Q. So, subjected to your examination, this patient did not come up to the level
psychological examination, patient was noted to be evasive, suspicious, and where he could be diagnosed as having delusion and hallucinations?
manipulative but no psychotic features were observed upon evaluation. . . . A. Leading to psychotic features.

Q. So, let us first, may I ask, what do you me(a)n by ‘patient was noted to be Q. So, that is the meaning of not having psychotic features?
evasive, suspicious, and manipulative'? A. Yes." 24
A. Actually, during the psychological examination, we have to give series of
questions. And then the patient (does) not answer directly to our question. He The insanity issue raised by appellant boils down to the credibility of these two
would go around the bush. And then, after that, we also found out during the result expert witnesses and their respective testimonies. The time-honored doctrine is
of the psychological examination that the same pattern was noted. that the question of which witness to believe is one best addressed by the trial
court. The findings of fact of the judges who heard the evidence are accorded great
Q. Does this mean that he was totally capable of being manipulative or evasive? respect and are seldom disturbed on appeal for they had the opportunity to directly
A. Yes. observe the witnesses, and to determine by their demeanor on the stand the
probative value of their testimonies. 25 The Court finds no cogent reason to disturb
Q. He did it intentionally? the ruling of the trial court which found Dr. Servando’s testimony more credible for
A. Yes. the following reasons:

Q. With the knowledge that he knew the answer but does not want to give the "1. It could not be gainsaid that Dr. Servando is a disinterested and unbiased
answer? witness. She does not know the accused and she is not known to the accused. She
A. Yes. will not be benefited if the Court upholds her findings and she had no reason to
testify falsely. On the other hand, Dr. Gauzon was admittedly paid for his services,
Q. Meaning to say, that he has full control of his mental faculties that time?
hence, it could not be truly said that he is an impartial and disinterested witness. If alone and if found to be sane, a judgment of conviction is rendered without any
his findings (are) upheld, the benefit to the practice of his profession is enormous; trial on the issue of guilt as he had already admitted committing the crime. . . ." 28

"2. As a government official, Dr. Servando has the presumption of regularity in the Inasmuch as Belonio failed to present convincing evidence to establish his alleged
performance of her duty. No such presumption arises in favor of Dr. Gauzon; insanity at the time he stabbed Tamayo, we are constrained to affirm his conviction.

"3. The findings of Dr. Servando that the accused is evasive and manipulative is We must add that we have meticulously reviewed the records of this case,
supported by the Court’s own observation. . . . especially the evidence of the prosecution. We find no reason to modify, much less
"4. The conclusion of Dr. Gauzon is principally based on his interview with the reverse, the findings of the trial court that, indeed, appellant’s guilt for murder has
accused and the members of the accused’s family. It was the members of the been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
accused’s family, the sister of the accused who informed Dr. Gauzon that at the age
of 13, the accused began to use drugs. The information that the family of the We now look into the propriety of the penalty imposed by the trial court.
accused was impoverished; that the accused spent his adolescence in Metro-
Manila; that the accused was a neglected child were all supplied by the kins of the Under Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 7659, any person
accused who were not presented as witnesses. There was no showing that Dr. found guilty of murder shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death. The same
Gauzon took precautionary steps to validate the information. On the other hand, Code further instructs that when in the commission of the crime there is present an
Dr. Servando also conducted interview of the accused and his accompanying aggravating circumstance which is not offset by any mitigating circumstance, the
relatives including the BJMP guard who escorted him. In addition, Dr. Servando greater penalty shall be applied. 29
conducted a series of written tests which are tailored to determine the mental
capacity of a person. The result of the written tests confirms the observation of Dr. A review of the records supports the conclusion of the trial court on the presence of
Servando in the interview that the accused is evasive and manipulative." 26 treachery, which qualified the crime to murder. For treachery to be appreciated,
two elements must concur: (1) the means of execution employed gave the person
Unlike in other jurisdictions, Philippine courts have established a more stringent attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate; and (2) the means of
criterion for the acceptance of insanity as an exempting circumstance. In our execution was deliberately or consciously adopted. 30
jurisdiction, mere abnormality of the mental faculties is not enough; there must be
a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. In the present case, Jennifer Carampatana testified on how the killing was executed,
as follows:
Every individual is presumed to have acted with complete grasp of one’s mental "Q. What did you do there?
faculties. Appellant’s past does not discredit the facts that (1) he did not act with A. While we were conversing at that bench, after a short while, or five (5) minutes,
complete absence of the power to discern; (2) he was not deprived of reason; and Randy Belonio came and he asked to light his cigarette because Ramy was smoking
(3) he was not totally deprived of his will. EDACSa at that time. He was allowed by Ramy to light his cigarette.

As held in People vs. Madarang, Q. Was there any conversation between Ramy Tamayo and Randy Belonio aside
from asking lighting of cigarette?
"An accused invoking the insanity defense pleads not guilty by reason thereof. He A. While asking to light the cigarette, Randy inquired from Ramy why he was there,
admits committing the crime but claims that he is not guilty because he was insane Ramy told him that he is attending the wake of his grandmother. Further, Randy
at the time of its commission. Hence, the accused is tried on the issue of sanity asked him where he came from? And Ramy answered that he is from Hda. Bubog.
Q. After that what did Randy Belonio do if he did anything?
A. He (sat) for a while, and a little while after that, he took a look at Ramy. After Q. That means that Ramy Tamayo did not see Randy Belonio who was coming from
some minutes, he went out. the house?
A. Yes, Ma’am.
Q. And after few minutes was there any incident happened?
A. After three (3) minutes Randy went back. He just walk normally, and when he COURT:
was near Ramy he stabbed Ramy hitting on the chest and while the weapon was
still on the breast of Ramy I stood up and ran away. Let me interrupt. He was facing you? Ramy was facing you while you were facing
the direction where the house of Randy Belonio, so that Ramy was facing on the
Q. From what direction did Randy came when he approach you? other side?
A. He came from their house because their house is near our house.
WITNESS:
Q. In relation to you, where is this house located?
A. Witness indicating that he came from her side, where the house is situated. A. Yes, sir.

Q. And which side did you sit, the side near the direction of the house of Randy COURT:
Belonio or far from the house of Belonio?
A. The other side. Proceed.

COURT: APP AGRAVIADOR:

It was Ramy who was sitting near the house of Ramy? Q. When Randy Belonio suddenly thrust the knife on the chest of Ramy Tamayo, did
you see the reaction of Ramy Tamayo?
WITNESS: A. He was not able to move. After that, I want to ran to the house.

A. Yes, sir. APP AGRAVIADOR:

APP AGRAVIADOR: Q. When for the first time did you see the weapon used by Randy Belonio in taking
the life of Ramy Tamayo?
Q. And what was the position of Ramy Tamayo when he was suddenly stab. A. When he thrusted that knife.
A. He was sitting in this manner.
COURT:
COURT INTERPRETER:
Before or after he delivered the stabbing blow?
Witness illustrating by crossing her legs over the other legs and move slightly her
body was in side way. A. At the moment he delivered the stabbing blow, that was the first time I saw that
knife.
APP AGRAVIADOR:
APP AGRAVIADOR:
Actual damages for the hospital expenses in the amount of P3,627.70 were duly
Q. When you saw Randy Belonio approaching Ramy Tamayo . . . , you did not see supported by receipts. However instead of awarding actual damages, we grant
the knife? temperate damages in accordance with People vs. Andres, 36 where the Court said:
A. Because he was wearing long sleeve to cover his hand." 31
"[W]e declared in the case of People vs. Villanueva that:
Appellant’s acts of leaving, then returning after a few minutes armed with a knife —
which he concealed while approaching the victim and which he used in stabbing '. . . when actual damages proven by receipts during the trial amount to less than
him — while the latter was sitting, unaware and not forewarned of any danger, P25,000, as in this case, the award of temperate damages for P25,000 is justified in
manifest a deliberate employment of means to ensure the killing without risk to lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount. Conversely, if the amount of actual
himself arising from the defense which the victim might make. damages proven exceeds P25,000, then temperate damages may no longer be
awarded; actual damages based on the receipts presented during trial should
The aggravating circumstance of recidivism, which was alleged in the Information instead be granted.'
was also duly proven. "A recidivist is one who at the time of his trial for one crime,
shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced "The victim’s heirs should, thus, be awarded temperate damages in the amount of
in the same title of this Code." 32 The records 33 show that appellant was P25,000." 37
previously convicted by final judgment of Homicide, which like Murder, falls under
the title of “Crimes against Persons." Three Justices of the Court maintain their position that R.A. No. 7659 is
unconstitutional insofar as it prescribes the death penalty. Nevertheless they
The award by the court a quo of P50,000 as civil indemnity is in accordance with submit to the ruling of the majority that the law is constitutional and the death
jurisprudence. 34 The amount of P25,000 as exemplary damages should also be penalty can be lawfully imposed in the case at bar.
given because of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of recidivism.
However, the court erred in awarding the amount of P940,716 as loss of earning WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision in Criminal Case No. 00-20595 convicting the
capacity. In “accordance with the formula adopted by the Court in Villa Rey Transit, appellant of the crime of murder and sentencing him to DEATH is AFFIRMED. The
Inc. vs. CA (31 SCRA 511 [1970]), and using the American Expectancy Table of award for loss of earning capacity is INCREASED to P1,362,545; moral damages is
Mortality," 35 the loss of Tamayo’s earning capacity is to be computed as follows: REDUCED to P50,000; actual damages is DELETED but temperate damages of
P25,000 and exemplary damages of P25,000 are awarded. HTDAac
Net earning capacity = Life expectancy x (Gross Annual Income – Living
Expenses) In accordance with Section 25 of R.A. 7659 amending Section 23 of the Revised
Penal Code, let the records of this case be forthwith forwarded, upon finality of this
where: Life expectancy = 2/3 (80 – the age of the deceased) decision, to the Office of the President for possible exercise of the pardoning
= 2/3 (80-24) x [(P200x365)- P36,500] power.
= P1,362,545
The award for loss of earning capacity should therefore be P1,362,545. Costs against appellant.

There being testimonial evidence in support of moral damages, an award for it is SO ORDERED.
proper. However, it should be reduced to the more reasonable amount of P50,000
considering that it is not meant to enrich an injured party.