People of the Philippines vs. Antido

The death of an accused pending appeal of his conviction totally extinguishes criminal liability as well as civil liability ex delicto (based solely on the offense committed), though civil liability predicated on other sources of obligation under Article 1157 of the Civil Code survives and may be pursued in a separate civil action against the executor, administrator, or estate of the accused.

Accused-appellant Romeo Antido was charged with and convicted of the crime of Rape under Republic Act No. 8353 in the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 29 (Criminal Case No. 03-212115). The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in its Decision dated December 7, 2012, sentencing him to suffer reclusion perpetua and ordering the payment of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court, which initially affirmed the conviction in a Resolution dated April 7, 2014.

• The Charge and Conviction: Accused-appellant Romeo Antido y Lantayan was charged with and found guilty of the crime of Rape punishable under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A in relation to paragraph 5 of Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353.
• The Appellate Affirmance: The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in its Decision dated December 7, 2012, sentencing the accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay the private complainant ₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity, ₱75,000.00 as moral damages, and ₱30,000.00 as exemplary damages.
• Initial Supreme Court Action: In a Resolution dated April 7, 2014, the Supreme Court adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court of Appeals and affirmed the conviction and sentence.
• Supervening Death: Before the promulgation of the April 7, 2014 Resolution, accused-appellant died on December 28, 2013. This was evidenced by his Certificate of Death submitted to the Court.
• Effect of Death: The Court noted that under Article 89(1) of the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the convict as to personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability is extinguished only when death occurs before final judgment.

• Effect of Death Pending Appeal: Whether the death of the accused-appellant pending appeal extinguishes his criminal liability and the civil liability based solely on the offense.
• Survival of Civil Liability: Whether any civil liability survives the death of the accused-appellant, and if so, under what conditions and against whom it may be enforced.

• Extinguishment of Criminal Liability: Criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the accused pending appeal. Article 89(1) of the Revised Penal Code provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the convict as to personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment. The death of the accused-appellant on December 28, 2013, prior to the finality of the conviction, terminated his criminal liability.
• Extinguishment of Civil Liability ex delicto: The civil action instituted in the criminal case for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished upon the death of the accused pending appeal, grounded as it is on the criminal action. The civil liability based solely on the offense committed (ex delicto in senso strictiore) does not survive the death of the accused.
• Survival of Civil Liability Based on Other Sources: Civil liability may survive notwithstanding the death of the accused if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict. Under Article 1157 of the Civil Code, these other sources include law, contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts. In such cases, the private offended party may file a separate civil action against the executor, administrator, or estate of the accused, subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended.
• Prescription of Civil Action: The private offended party need not fear forfeiture of the right to file a separate civil action by prescription if, during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the civil action was instituted together therewith. In such cases, the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case, conformably with Article 1155 of the Civil Code.

• Effects of Death Pending Appeal (People v. Culas Doctrine) — The death of an accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based solely thereon (ex delicto in senso strictiore). However, the claim for civil liability survives if the same may be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict, such as those enumerated in Article 1157 of the Civil Code: law, contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts. Where the civil liability survives, an action for recovery may be pursued only by way of filing a separate civil action against the executor, administrator, or estate of the accused, subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. Finally, prescription of the civil action is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case if the civil action was instituted together with the criminal action, pursuant to Article 1155 of the Civil Code.
• Extinguishment of Criminal Liability by Death (Article 89(1), RPC) — Criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the convict as to personal penalties; as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.

• "From this lengthy disquisition, we summarize our ruling herein: 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability[,] as well as the civil liability[,] based solely thereon... 2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict... 3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section l, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended... 4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private-offended party instituted together therewith the civil action." — Summarizing the four-point doctrine from People v. Culas regarding the effects of death of an accused pending appeal.
• "Thus, upon accused-appellant's death pending appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action instituted therein for the recovery of the civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal action." — Clarifying the immediate effect of death on the criminal action and the civil liability ex delicto.

• People v. Culas, G.R. No. 211166, June 5, 2017 — Controlling precedent establishing the four-point rule on the effects of death of an accused pending appeal, distinguishing between civil liability ex delicto (which is extinguished) and civil liability based on other sources of obligation (which survives).
• People v. Layag, G.R. No. 214875, October 17, 2016, 806 SCRA 190 — Cited in People v. Culas regarding the interruption of prescription during the pendency of the criminal case.

• Article 89(1), Revised Penal Code — Provides for the total extinguishment of criminal liability by the death of the convict as to personal penalties, and the extinguishment of pecuniary penalties only when death occurs before final judgment.
• Article 1157, Civil Code — Enumerates the sources of obligation from which civil liability may arise: law, contracts, quasi-contracts, delicts, and quasi-delicts. Applied to determine when civil liability survives the death of the accused.
• Article 1155, Civil Code — Provides that the prescription of actions is interrupted when an action is filed before the court. Applied to hold that the statute of limitations on civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case if the civil action was instituted therewith.
• Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure (as amended) — Governs the institution of separate civil actions that survive the extinction of the criminal action.
• Article 266-A in relation to Article 266-B, Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 — The substantive law defining the crime of Rape and its penalties, under which the accused was convicted.

Antonio T. Carpio (Acting Chief Justice), Mariano C. Del Castillo, Samuel R. Martires, and Noel Gimenez Tijam.

None.