People vs. Piamonte

In robbery with homicide, the accused are responsible for the death of the victim when the wounds inflicted, though not the immediate cause, are the proximate cause of death; and where conspiracy is established, the extrajudicial confession of one conspirator is admissible as corroborative evidence against the others.

The case arises under Article 294, paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code, which penalizes robbery with homicide with reclusion perpetua to death. The accused — Agustin Piamonte, Guillermo Mascariñas, and Vicente Jasme, Jr. — were residents of Baybay, Leyte, and acquaintances who attended a dance at the Baybay National Agricultural School on the evening preceding the crime. The victim, Magno Israel, was a resident of Barrio Gabas, Baybay, Leyte, and was personally known to Mascariñas. The prosecution relied substantially on extrajudicial confessions, an ante mortem declaration of the victim, and circumstantial evidence including blood-stained clothing.

Early in the morning of October 28, 1951, a robbery was committed at the house of Magno Israel in Barrio Gabas, municipality of Baybay, Leyte. In the course of the robbery, Israel was seriously wounded and was brought to the Western Leyte Hospital in Baybay for treatment. Upon being informed of the incident, the Chief of Police of Baybay sent a policeman to the hospital, where the wounded victim was found groaning from his serious injuries. The policeman was nevertheless able to obtain statements from Israel regarding the robbery, which the policeman typed upon returning to his office. The following morning, the Chief of Police and the Justice of the Peace went to the hospital to verify the correctness of the statements attributed to the victim. They found him restless, pale, breathing hard, and entirely bandaged, with his legs and hands tied to his bed. The attending nurse informed them that the medicine being administered was only to prolong his life. The Justice of the Peace read the written statements to the patient and, after confirming that he understood them, asked him to ratify them under oath. In his affidavit, Israel stated that of the persons who went to his house that morning, he was able to identify only Guillermo Mascariñas, who was long known to him. The robbers took away his cash amounting to P320. He was not able to identify those who actually wounded him.

The revelation by Israel led to the arrest of Mascariñas, who upon investigation gave a written confession (Exhibit F). He stated that early in the morning of October 28, 1951, he was invited by Agustin Piamonte and Vicente Jasme, Jr. to go to Israel's house to rob him, and since they were his friends, he agreed. Upon arrival, Piamonte went upstairs followed closely by Jasme, Jr., while Mascariñas remained downstairs to guard. While guarding, he noticed that Israel offered resistance, and so his two companions assaulted him. Upon hearing Israel's screams, he became frightened and ran away. Piamonte was likewise arrested and gave a written confession. He stated that in the afternoon of October 27, 1951, Mascariñas revealed his plan to rob Israel's house. While Piamonte and Jasme, Jr. were attending a dance at the Baybay National Agricultural School, they met Mascariñas, who told them that after the dance they would proceed to the house they planned to rob. To avoid recognition by Israel, who knew Mascariñas personally, Mascariñas borrowed the clothes of Jasme, Jr. When they arrived at Israel's house, Piamonte and Mascariñas went upstairs; when Piamonte focused his flashlight on a trunk, Mascariñas ransacked it. Israel was awakened and Mascariñas stabbed him several times with a hunting knife. Piamonte became afraid and ran downstairs followed by Mascariñas. Jasme, Jr., who had been left downstairs, had already gone ahead on the road. On their way home, upon reaching a bridge, Mascariñas took off the clothes he had borrowed from Jasme, Jr. and returned them. Jasme, Jr. was also arrested but refused to give any statement to the police.

Israel was operated on the very day he was brought to the hospital. The operation was successful, but he had a stormy post-operative period. On December 19, 1951, he contracted mucuous colitis, which developed because of his weakened condition. He died on December 28. At trial, Mascariñas testified in his own defense that he, Piamonte, and Jasme, Jr. went to Israel's house not to rob but merely to escort Jasme, Jr., who was Israel's nephew. He claimed he signed his confession because policeman Aurelio Altivo threatened to send him to the constabulary headquarters at Ormoc City. Jasme, Jr.'s defense consisted of alibi: he admitted attending the dance but denied meeting his co-accused there, claiming he went home with a different group and arrived at 4:00 a.m. He denied knowing Israel or the place where he lived, and stated that one week before the dance, Piamonte had come to buy his pants and shirt, which he agreed to sell because he owed Piamonte P3.00. Flaviana Escuadra testified that in the early morning of October 28, 1951, Jasme, Jr. came to her house and left a pair of trousers and shirt which, upon inspection, were found to be tainted with blood.

• Voluntariness of Confession: Whether Mascariñas's extrajudicial confession was obtained through coercion and thus inadmissible.
• Sufficiency of Evidence Against Jasme, Jr.: Whether the evidence was sufficient to convict Vicente Jasme, Jr. given that he gave no confession and raised the defense of alibi.
• Conspiracy: Whether conspiracy existed among the three accused such that the confession of one could be used against the others.
• Proximate Cause of Death: Whether the wounds inflicted on the victim were the proximate cause of his death, notwithstanding that he died of mucuous colitis contracted two months after the stabbing.
• Proper Penalty: Whether the maximum penalty of death should be imposed given the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and dwelling without any mitigating circumstance.

• Voluntariness of Confession: No. The confession was voluntary; the investigation was conducted by the Chief of Police, and the Justice of the Peace before whom it was signed affirmed its voluntariness in court, corroborated by the Chief of Police.
• Sufficiency of Evidence Against Jasme, Jr.: Yes. His guilt was established by the confessions of his co-accused, which placed him at the scene in furtherance of a robbery plan, and by the testimony of Flaviana Escuadra that he left blood-stained clothing at her house.
• Conspiracy: Yes. Conspiracy was evident from the concerted actions of the three accused — they attended the dance together, proceeded to the victim's house together, and the robbery and wounding followed shortly thereafter; the confession of one conspirator was admissible as corroborative evidence against the others.
• Proximate Cause of Death: Yes. The wounds were the proximate cause of death; although not the immediate cause, the victim's weakened condition from the wounds made possible the contraction of mucuous colitis, which caused his death.
• Proper Penalty: No. Notwithstanding the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and dwelling without mitigating circumstances, the Court deemed reclusion perpetua commensurate to the crime.

• Voluntariness of Confession: Mascariñas claimed he signed his confession because policeman Aurelio Altivo threatened to send him to the constabulary headquarters at Ormoc City. This claim was rejected because the investigation was conducted by the Chief of Police, and Altivo's only participation was to type the answers. The Justice of the Peace before whom the confession was signed affirmed in court that it was signed voluntarily, and this testimony was corroborated by the Chief of Police. The Court found no justifiable reason to brush aside the testimony of these officials in the absence of any showing that they testified for improper or personal reasons.

• Sufficiency of Evidence Against Jasme, Jr.: Jasme, Jr. gave no confession and raised alibi, claiming he went home with a different group after the dance. However, his co-accused testified that he went with them to Israel's house that evening. While the co-accused attempted to minimize his involvement by stating their purpose was merely to escort Jasme, Jr. to his uncle's house, the Court found their real purpose was to rob Israel pursuant to a plan arranged the previous night, as manifested in their extrajudicial confessions. The testimony of Flaviana Escuadra that Jasme, Jr. came to her house in the early morning of October 28, 1951 and left blood-stained trousers and shirt further strengthened his guilt. His alibi was insufficient to overcome this evidence.

• Conspiracy: The Court found conspiracy evident from the concerted conduct of the three accused. They were together at the dance, went home together, proceeded to Israel's house, and shortly thereafter Israel was found seriously wounded and robbed. Their suspicious behavior in laying blame on each other regarding the injuries further indicated concerted action. Where conspiracy exists, the extrajudicial confession of one is admissible and may be considered as corroborative evidence against the others. The Court cited People vs. Badilla, 48 Phil. 718, for the principle that when extrajudicial confessions made by several persons charged with conspiracy are identical in all material respects and there was no collusion, such identity is confirmatory of the testimony of an accomplice.

• Proximate Cause of Death: Israel did not die immediately after the infliction of the wounds and survived for some time due to the operation and medical treatment. However, he died as a result of mucuous colitis contracted because of his weakened condition resulting from the wounds. The attending doctors agreed that this weakened condition, which caused disturbance in the functions of his intestines, made possible the contraction of mucuous colitis. While the wounds were not the immediate cause, they were the proximate cause of death, which was sufficient to make the accused responsible for the crime charged.

• Proper Penalty: The crime committed was robbery with homicide punishable by reclusion perpetua to death under Article 294, paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code. The Solicitor General recommended the maximum penalty given the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and dwelling without any mitigating circumstance. However, some members of the Court were of the opinion that reclusion perpetua would be commensurate, and the Court adopted that penalty, affirming the lower court's sentence.

• Proximate Cause in Criminal Law — When the wounds inflicted by the accused are not the immediate cause of death but set in motion the chain of events leading to death, they constitute the proximate cause. The accused are responsible for the resulting death if the victim's weakened condition from the wounds made possible the contraction of a fatal illness. In this case, Israel's stab wounds weakened his body, causing intestinal dysfunction that enabled mucuous colitis, from which he died two months later; the wounds were thus the proximate cause.

• Conspiracy and Admissibility of Confessions — Where conspiracy is established among co-accused, the extrajudicial confession of one conspirator is admissible and may be considered as corroborative evidence against the others. The Court relied on People vs. Badilla, 48 Phil. 718, for the rule that when extrajudicial confessions made by several persons charged with conspiracy are identical in material respects and free from collusion, such identity confirms the testimony of an accomplice.

• Ante Mortem Declarations — Statements made by a victim who is in a very serious condition and would have succumbed but for medical intervention partake of the nature of ante mortem declarations. Such declarations are admissible where the victim's condition at the time of making the statement indicates an awareness of impending death or at least a serious and precarious state. Israel's statements were taken while he was restless, pale, breathing hard, entirely bandaged, and restrained in bed, with the attending nurse confirming that medication was only to prolong his life.

• Voluntariness of Confessions — A confession is voluntary where the investigation is conducted by proper authorities, the confession is signed before a Justice of the Peace who affirms its voluntariness in court, and there is no showing that the officials testified for improper or personal reasons. A bare claim of coercion by a subordinate officer, contradicted by the testimony of the investigating officials, is insufficient to invalidate a confession.

• "But the fact remains that he did as a result of the mucuous colitis he contracted because of his weak condition resulting from the wounds he had received. The doctors who attended him are agreed that this weakened condition which had caused disturbance in the functions of his intestines made it possible for him to contract mucuous colitis, which shows that, while said wounds were not the immediate cause, they were however the proximate cause of death." — This passage articulates the ratio decidendi on proximate cause: that wounds which set in motion the fatal chain of events, even if not the immediate cause of death, suffice to establish criminal responsibility for homicide.

• "There being conspiracy in the commission of the crime the confession of one is admissible and can be considered as corroborative evidence against the other." — This states the controlling doctrine on the admissibility of a co-conspirator's confession as corroborative evidence once conspiracy is established.

• "it has been held that when extrajudicial confessions had been made by several persons charged with conspiracy and there could have been no collusion with reference to the several confessions, the fact that the statements were in all material respects identical, was confirmatory of the testimony of an accomplice." — This quotation from People vs. Badilla, 48 Phil. 718, sets forth the canonical formulation of the rule on identical confessions in conspiracy cases, frequently cited in subsequent jurisprudence.

• People vs. Badilla, 48 Phil. 718 — Cited as controlling authority for the proposition that when extrajudicial confessions made by several persons charged with conspiracy are identical in all material respects and free from collusion, such identity is confirmatory of the testimony of an accomplice. The Court applied this principle to admit the confessions of Mascariñas and Piamonte as corroborative evidence against Jasme, Jr.

• Article 294, paragraph 1, Revised Penal Code — Defines and penalizes robbery with homicide, prescribing the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. The Court applied this provision to classify the crime and determine the range of penalties, ultimately imposing reclusion perpetua notwithstanding the presence of aggravating circumstances.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, and Labrador, JJ., concurred. Padilla, J., concurred in the result.