People vs. Redulosa

A death sentence imposed before February 2, 1987 was automatically commuted to reclusion perpetua by the 1987 Constitution, converting automatic review into a continuable appeal that the accused may terminate by withdrawal with Court approval, unaffected by the prospective reimposition of death under R.A. No. 7659 for prior crimes.

Romeo Redulosa is a first cousin of Luisita Tan, mother of the kidnapping victim, linking the accused to the victim's family. Art. III, Sec. 19(1) of the Constitution, which took effect on February 2, 1987, prohibited imposition of the death penalty and commuted imposed death sentences. R.A. No. 7659, which took effect on December 31, 1993, later reimposed the death penalty for heinous crimes including kidnapping for ransom with murder.

Noel Tano, a former army man and security guard at Southwestern University, testified for the prosecution that Romeo Redulosa proposed kidnapping Christopher Jason Tan, the nine-year-old son of Luisita and Tomas Tan and a student of Sacred Heart School for Boys, and included Roselo Carton in the plan. The first two attempts to lure the boy out of campus on the pretext that his parents wanted to see him failed. Tano was stricken by conscience but was prevailed upon to stay for a third plan under which Redulosa would drive a taxicab to bump Tomas Tan's car, the group would alight pretending to be military men to scare the father, and Tano and Carton would snatch the child in the confusion. That attempt also failed, after which Tano said he dropped out.

On the morning of December 3, 1981, Tomas Tan received a telephone call demanding P100,000.00 ransom for Jason, who had been kidnapped earlier that morning. Because Tomas said he could not raise the amount on short notice, the amount was reduced to P15,000.00 to be left inside his car parked near the Taoist Temple at around noon. At around 2 P.M. the caller phoned again, said he was not able to get the money, asked Tomas to be ready with P50,000.00, and said he would call again after five days but never did.

The matter was reported to the police and referred to the team headed by PC Technical Sgt. Godofredo Lucasan. Lucasan testified that they picked up Noel Tano, who pointed to appellant as the possible kidnapper. After apprehension, appellant executed an extra-judicial confession and implicated Roselo Carton, who was soon arrested. Appellant led the police to where Jason's body was found in an advanced stage of decomposition, identified through dental records.

Redulosa, for his part, alleged that the mastermind was a certain Sonny of the military introduced by Noel Tano, who believed Tomas Tan was a millionaire from insurance fraud and arson involving a relative used as a firebug and then killed, and who proposed the kidnapping as revenge and easy money. Redulosa claimed he agreed only because Sonny threatened his wife and family, that on December 3, 1981 Sonny and Tano boarded his car at gunpoint after he had taken his physician-wife to the hospital and ordered him to Sacred Heart School, where Tano returned with Jason, and that they proceeded to Redulosa's residence at San Isidro, Talisay, Cebu where Tano called the father. According to Redulosa, he was taping the call when Tano ordered him out, he tried to leave to report to police but Sonny forced him back, the group later took lunch at his residence after Jason complained of hunger, proceeded to Tabunoc where Sonny transferred Jason to his Toyota, and in Carcar Sonny told him to return to Cebu City. Redulosa claimed he heard nothing until seven days later when told the full ransom was not paid but assured his nephew was safe, and that he was arrested on December 25, 1991.

Domestic servants Panfila Obado and Jerry Belonta testified that Redulosa and Carton brought Christopher Jason Tan to the Redulosa residence at around 9:00 in the morning of December 3, 1981, transferred the telephone from the sala to the bedroom, and kept the child locked in the room until 2:30 in the afternoon. The child was deathly pale and frantic, calling "Don't leave me, Tio" whenever Redulosa left, while Redulosa gave orders, moved in and out freely, and ordered lunch cooked. The trial court found that Redulosa made the ransom call during that confinement and that both accused brought the child out at 2:30 that afternoon toward the south where the boy was stabbed to death.

• Withdrawal of Appeal: Whether appellant, whose death sentence was commuted by the 1987 Constitution and whose case continued only as an appealed case, may withdraw his appeal.
• Prospectivity of Reimposed Death Penalty: Whether R.A. No. 7659 reimposing the death penalty for kidnapping for ransom with murder bars withdrawal or applies to appellant's crime committed in 1981.

• Withdrawal of Appeal: Yes. Having the right to continue as an appealed case after commutation, appellant likewise has the right, subject to Court approval, to terminate it by withdrawal.
• Prospectivity of Reimposed Death Penalty: No. R.A. No. 7659 took effect December 31, 1993 and does not apply to crimes committed prior to its effectivity, leaving the commuted reclusion perpetua intact.

• Withdrawal of Appeal: The death penalty imposed was automatically reduced to reclusion perpetua under Art. III, Sec. 19(1) effective February 2, 1987, so the case ceased to be in the Court by virtue of automatic review under Rule 122, Sec. 9. Under the April 30, 1987 resolution in Administrative Matter No. 87-5-3173-0, embodied in Circular No. 9 dated May 20, 1987, accused were notified of commutation and given thirty days to state with counsel's assistance whether to continue as an appealed case, with failure or satisfaction leading to dismissal and remand for execution as modified. Because this case remained only due to appellant's August 20, 1990 notice to continue, the same option supported termination by withdrawal, which both appellant's counsel and the Solicitor General urged to approve after voluntariness was confirmed.
• Prospectivity of Reimposed Death Penalty: R.A. No. 7659 reimposing death for heinous crimes including the offense charged took effect December 31, 1993 and, under settled prospectivity, does not govern the December 3, 1981 kidnapping and killing. The Constitutional Commission deliberations confirmed that commuted death sentences would not revert even if Congress reimposed death on the same crimes, as any new law would be prospective in character.

• Commutation by constitutional abolition of death penalty — Death penalties already imposed were automatically commuted to reclusion perpetua by virtue of Art. III, Sec. 19(1) of the 1987 Constitution effective February 2, 1987. Applied to reduce appellant's death sentence and remove the case from automatic review, leaving it pending only as a continued ordinary appeal.
• Conversion of automatic review and option to continue appeal — Where death was commuted, accused were to be notified and given thirty days, with counsel's assistance, to elect in a personally signed statement whether to continue as an appealed case; election to continue leads to judgment of affirmance, modification, or reversal, while satisfaction or silence leads to dismissal and remand for execution as modified. Applied to explain why appellant's August 20, 1990 notice kept the case in the Court.
• Withdrawal of appeal with judicial approval — Just as the accused may elect to continue review after commutation, the accused may terminate the continued appeal by withdrawal subject to approval of the Court. Applied to grant Redulosa's Urgent Motion to Withdraw Appeal, found voluntary and unopposed.
• Prospectivity of R.A. No. 7659 — The law reimposing death for heinous crimes effective December 31, 1993 does not apply to crimes committed prior to its effectivity. Applied to hold that appellant's 1981 offense remained punishable only by the commuted reclusion perpetua and withdrawal was unaffected.

• "However, as appellant had the right to continue with his case as an appealed one, so does he have a right — subject to the approval of this Court — to terminate the appeal by withdrawing it." — States the controlling ratio on withdrawal, equating the right to continue review after commutation with the right to end it.
• "To begin with the death penalty imposed on appellant was automatically reduced to reclusion perpetua in view of Art. III, §19 (1) of the Constitution which took effect on February 2, 1987." — Defines the constitutional commutation that removed the case from automatic review.
• "Any new law [reimposing the death penalty] passed by the National Assembly would be prospective in character." — Quotes the Constitutional Commission deliberation relied upon to hold R.A. No. 7659 inapplicable to prior crimes.

• People vs. Simon, 234 SCRA 555 (1994) — Cited in connection with R.A. No. 7659 providing for reimposition of the death penalty for heinous crimes including that charged.
• People vs. Cayanan, 245 SCRA 66 (1995) — Cited as authority that the new death-penalty law does not apply to crimes committed prior to its effectivity.
• People vs. Pandiano, 232 SCRA 619 (1994) — Cited as additional authority for non-retroactive application of the reimposed death penalty.

• Art. III, Sec. 19(1), 1987 Constitution — Abolished the death penalty and commuted imposed death sentences; applied to automatically reduce appellant's death sentence to reclusion perpetua effective February 2, 1987.
• R.A. No. 7659 — Reimposed death for heinous crimes including kidnapping for ransom with murder effective December 31, 1993; held prospective and inapplicable to the 1981 offense.
• Rule 122, Sec. 9, Rules of Court — Required automatic review of death sentences; held no longer to retain the case after commutation.
• Rule 124, Sec. 8, Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure — Basis for dismissal of co-accused Carton's appeal after his December 16, 1983 escape.
• Rule 122, Sec. 12, Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure — Compared as governing withdrawal of appeal in lower courts before transmittal or before judgment on appeal.
• Supreme Court Circular No. 9 dated May 20, 1987 (Resolution dated April 30, 1987 in Administrative Matter No. 87-5-3173-0) — Required notice of commutation and thirty-day election to continue as appealed case, otherwise dismissal and remand for execution as modified; applied to treat appellant's case as continued only by his election.

Regalado, J., Romero, J., and Puno, J., concur. Torres, Jr., J., is on leave.