Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Appeal in capital offenses - Mateo doctrine


PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. EFREN MATEO y GARCIA, G.R. NO. 147678-87, July 7, 2004.
         
“x x x.

Up until now, the Supreme Court has assumed the direct appellate review over all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (or lower but involving offenses committed on the same occasion or arising out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed).  The practice finds justification in the 1987 Constitution –

Article VIII, Section 5.  The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

“(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:

“x x x                                      x x x                              x x x

“(d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.”



The same constitutional article has evidently been a thesis for Article 47 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 22 of Republic Act No. 7659,[i][10] as well as procedural rules contained in Section 3 of Rule 122,[ii][11] Section 10 of Rule 122,[iii][12] Section 13 of Rule 124[iv][13] and Section 3 of Rule 125[v][14] of the Rules of Court.  It must be stressed, however, that the constitutional provision is not preclusive in character, and it does not necessarily prevent the Court, in the exercise of its rule-making power, from adding an intermediate appeal or review in favor of the accused.

In passing, during the deliberations among the members of the Court, there has been a marked absence of unanimity on the crucial point of guilt or innocence of herein appellant.  Some are convinced that the evidence would appear to be sufficient to convict; some would accept the recommendation of acquittal from the Solicitor General on the ground of inadequate proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  Indeed, the occasion best demonstrates the typical dilemma, i.e., the determination and appreciation of primarily factual matters, which the Supreme Court has had to face with in automatic review cases; yet, it is the Court of Appeals that has aptly been given the direct mandate to review factual issues.

While the Fundamental Law requires a mandatory review by the Supreme Court of cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, or death, nowhere, however, has it proscribed an intermediate review.  If only to ensure utmost circumspection before the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed, the Court now deems it wise and compelling to provide in these cases a review by the Court of Appeals before the case is elevated to the Supreme Court.  Where life and liberty are at stake, all possible avenues to determine his guilt or innocence must be accorded an accused, and no care in the evaluation of the facts can ever be overdone.  A prior determination by the Court of Appeals on, particularly, the factual issues, would minimize the possibility of an error of judgment.  If the Court of Appeals should affirm the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, it could then render judgment imposing the corresponding penalty as the circumstances so warrant, refrain from entering judgment and elevate the entire records of the case to the Supreme Court for its final disposition.[vi][15]  

Statistics would disclose that within the eleven-year period since the re-imposition of the death penalty law in 1993 until June 2004, the trial courts have imposed capital punishment in approximately 1,493,[vii][16] out of which 907 cases[1][17] have been passed upon in review by the Court.  In the Supreme Court, where these staggering numbers find their way on automatic review, the penalty has been affirmed in only 230 cases comprising but 25.36% of the total number.  Significantly, in more than half or 64.61% of the cases, the judgment has been modified through an order of remand for further proceedings, by the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or by a reduction of the sentence.  Indeed, the reduction by the Court of the death penalty to reclusion perpetua has been made in no less than 483 cases or 53.25% of the total number.  The Court has also rendered a judgment of acquittal in sixty-five (65) cases.  In sum, the cases where the judgment of death has either been modified or vacated consist of an astounding 71.77% of the total of death penalty cases directly elevated before the Court on automatic review that translates to a total of six hundred fifty-one (651) out of nine hundred seven (907) appellants saved from lethal injection.

Under the Constitution, the power to amend rules of procedure is constitutionally vested in the Supreme Court -

          Article VIII, Section 5.  The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

“(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts.”  
            

Procedural matters, first and foremost, fall more squarely within the rule-making prerogative of the Supreme Court than the law-making power of Congress.  The rule here announced additionally allowing an intermediate review by the Court of Appeals, a subordinate appellate court, before the case is elevated to the Supreme Court on automatic review, is such a procedural matter.
    
Pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, more particularly Section 3 and Section 10 of Rule 122, Section 13 of Rule 124, Section 3 of Rule 125, and any other rule insofar as they provide for direct appeals from the Regional Trial Courts to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, as well as the resolution of the Supreme Court en banc, dated 19 September 1995, in "Internal Rules of the Supreme Court" in cases similarly involving the death penalty, are to be deemed modified accordingly. 

X x x.”


[1][17]        As per report from the Judicial Records Office of the Supreme Court, the following are the data as of 08 June 2004:

DISMISSED due to death of the Accused-Appellants ----26
AFFIRMED ----------------------------------------------------230          
MODIFIED:

a.     a.       FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ------------------------------------31
b.    b.       RECLUSION PERPETUA --------------------------------------483
c.     c.       INDETERMINATE SENTENCE ------------------------------72

ACQUITTED -----------------------------------------------------------65
                                                                                                                        907



[i][10]                     ART. 47.  In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed; Automatic Review of death penalty cases.  -  x x x

In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment by the court en banc, within twenty (20) days but not earlier than fifteen (15) days after promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of any motion for new trial or reconsideration.  The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10) days after the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter.      
[ii][11]                  Sec. 3.  How appeal taken.  –

                        x x x                                         x x x                                         x x x

(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by filing a notice of appeal in accordance with paragraph (a) of this Section.

(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional Trial Court.  The same shall be automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court as provided in section 10 of this Rule.
[iii][12]                 Sec. 10.  Transmission of records in case of death penalty.  - In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court, the records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment within five (5) days after the fifteenth (15th) day following the promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of a motion for new trial or reconsideration.  The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10) days after the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter.              
[iv][13]                    Sec. 13.  Quorum of the court; certification or appeal of cases to Supreme Court.  -  Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a division.  The unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before the writing of the opinion by a member of the division.  In the event that the three (3) Justices can not reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the Court to designate two (2) additional Justices to sit temporarily with them, forming a special division of five (5) members and the concurrence of a majority of such division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution.  The designation of such additional Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and rotation among all other Justices of the Court of Appeals.

Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment should be imposed in a case, the court, after discussion of the evidence and the law involved, shall render judgment imposing the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment as the circumstances warrant.  However, it shall refrain from entering the judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate the entire record thereof to the Supreme Court for review..           
[v][14]                    Sec. 3.  Decision if opinion is equally divided.  - When the Supreme Court en banc is equally divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be had on whether to acquit the appellant, the case shall again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached after re-deliberation, the judgment of conviction of the lower court shall be reversed and the accused acquitted.
[vi][15]        In this instance, then, the Supreme Court may exercise its “exclusive appellate jurisdiction” over all cases where the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed by lower courts, under applicable laws like Republic Act No. 296 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 129.
[vii][16]       As of 06 July 2004, the total number of cases pending in the Supreme Court are as follows:

Death Penalty -------------------------------------------------------------586
Life Imprisonment -------------------------------------------------------375
Reclusion Perpetua -----------------------------------------------------1320
2281

            The total number of cases certified by the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court for review are as follows:

Death Penalty ------------------------------------------------------------1
Life Imprisonment -------------------------------------------------------3
Reclusion Perpetua -----------------------------------------------------28
32