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
