508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED confused with the sentiment or excitement in the mind of a person injured or

offended to such a degree as to deprive him of his sanity and self-control.—–
People vs. Enguito
Appellant contends that he should have been convicted of the crime of homicide
G.R. No. 128812. February 28, 2000.* with two (2) mitigating circumstances of acting in passion and voluntary
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. THADEOS ENGUITO, surrender; and had the charge been homicide he could have pleaded guilty. We
accused-appellant. find that these mitigating circumstances cannot be appreciated in his favor.
Criminal Law;  Aberratio Ictus; A person is responsible for all the Accused-appellant was allegedly “still very angry” while he was following,
consequences of his unlawful or wrongful act although such consequences were bumping and pushing the motorela which was in front of him. He was previously
different from those which he originally intended.—– The defense disregards the mauled by the deceased and he was allegedly rendered unconscious by the blows
basic rule in criminal law that a person is responsible for all the consequences of inflicted on him. When he regained consciousness, he claims that he wanted to
his unlawful or wrongful act although such consequences were different from look for a policeman to report that he was mauled.
those which he originally intended. Even if it be assumed that the real intention 510
of
510 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
_______________
People vs. Enguito
*
THIRD DIVISION. Clearly, accused-appellant’s state of mind after he was mauled and before
he crushed Achumbre to death was such that he was still able to act reasonably.
509 In fact, he admitted having seen a police mobile patrol nearby but instead, he
chose to resort to the dastardly act which resulted in the death of Achumbre and
VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 509 in the injuries of the spouses Requerme. For passion to be considered as a
People vs. Enguito mitigating circumstance, facts must be proved to show causes sufficient to
accused-appellant was to surrender the victim to the police for mauling produce loss of self-control and to overcome reason. The turmoil and unreason
him, his act of pursuing the victim, who was a passenger of the motorela, which naturally result from a quarrel or fight should not be confused with the
resulted in the injuries of the driver and the other passenger of the motorela. sentiment or excitement in the mind of a person injured or offended to such a
Same; Murder;  Aggravating Circumstances; Motor Vehicle; The use of a degree as to deprive him of his sanity and self-control.
motor vehicle qualifies the killing to murder if the same was perpetrated by Same; Same; Same; Voluntary Surrender;  There can be no voluntary
means thereof.—–The indictment against accused-appellant is murder attended surrender when the accused stopped his vehicle farther than the police mobile
by the use of motor vehicle. The use of a motor vehicle qualifies the killing to and only when its right tire was already flat.—–The mitigating circumstance of
murder if the same was perpetrated by means thereof. Appellant’s claim that he voluntary surrender cannot be appreciated. Evidence shows that accused-
merely used the motor vehicle, Kia Ceres van, to stop the victim from escaping is appellant was further pursued by the police. Appellant himself testified that he
belied by his actuations. By his own admission, he testified that there was a stopped his vehicle just after the police mobile stopped but admitted having
police mobile patrol near the crossing. Accused-appellant could have easily “stopped farther than the police mobile.” SPO3 Catiil further testified that
sought the assistance of the police instead of taking the law into his own hands. appellant did not surrender but only stopped his vehicle when its right tire was
Moreover, accused-appellant already noticed the deceased trying to jump out of already flat. His testimony was corroborated by PO3 Makiling who was
the motorela but he still continued his pursuit. He did not stop the vehicle after patrolling the portion of Marcos Bridge. He testified that he saw the vehicle
hitting the deceased who was hit when he (Achumbre) was at the railing of the being driven by accused-appellant already destroyed and the right portion of the
Marcos bridge. Accused-appellant further used the vehicle in his attempt to vehicle a little bit lower as it was running flat. Clearly, accused-appellant could
escape. He was already more than one (1) kilometer away from the place of the have eluded arrest but his situation became futile when his vehicle suffered a flat
incident when he stopped his vehicle upon seeing the police mobile patrol which tire.
was following him. Same; Complex Crimes;  Murder with Less Serious Physical Injuries;
Same; Same; Mitigating Circumstances; Passion; For passion to be Penalties; The penalty for a complex crime shall be the maximum period of the
considered as a mitigating circumstance, facts must be proved to show causes penalty for the most serious crime.—The foregoing notwithstanding, the
sufficient to produce loss of self-control and to overcome reason; The turmoil existence or non-existence of a mitigating circumstance in the case at bar will not
and unreason which naturally result from a quarrel or fight should not be affect the penalty to be imposed pursuant to Article 63 of the Revised Penal
Code. The crime committed by accused-appellant is the complex crime of Exhibits “B” to “B-3” but no receipts were presented. Medical expenses are in
murder with less serious physical injuries. Under Article 48 of the Re-vised the
Penal Code, the penalty for a complex crime shall be the maximum period of the 512
penalty for the most serious crime. The crime was committed in 1992 where the
penalty for the crime of murder, which is the most serious crime, was reclusion 512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
temporal in People vs. Enguito
511 nature of actual damages which should be duly proved and the award for
actual damages cannot be made on the basis of the doctor’s prescriptions alone.
VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 511 There must be evidence of the actual amount thereof. Likewise the award of
People vs. Enguito exemplary damages to the spouses Requerme should be deleted for lack of basis.
its maximum period to death under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code.
The death penalty being the maximum period of the penalty for murder should APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of Cagayan de Oro City,
be imposed for the complex crime of murder with less serious physical injuries Br. 22.
considering that under Article 63, an indivisible penalty cannot be affected by
the presence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance. And, consonant with The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
the ruling in People vs. Muñoz that Article III, Section 19 (1) of the 1987      The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Constitution did not change the period of the penalty for murder except only      Reynaldo A. Vitorillo for accused-appellant.
insofar as it prohibits the imposition of the death penalty and reduces it
to reclusion perpetua, the Court of Appeals was correct in imposing the GONZAGA-REYES, J.:
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Damages; Evidence; Actual damages cannot be awarded based on the This case was certified for review pursuant to Section 13, Rule 124 of the Rules
allegation of a witness without any competent document to support such claim— on Criminal Procedure by the Court of Appeals 1 which found accused-appellant
proof is required to be adequately supported by receipts.—–As to the award of Thadeos Enguito guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder with
actual damages, the same cannot be based on the allegation of a witness without less serious physical injuries and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion
any competent document to support such claim. Proof is required to be perpetua.
adequately supported by receipts. The amount of P23,000.00 awarded by the trial Thadeos Enguito was charged with the crime of Murder with Multiple Less
court as funeral expenses should be reduced. Georgita Achumbre, widow of the Serious Physical Injuries under the following Information:
deceased-victim, testified that she spent P7,000.00 for embalming and funeral “That on September 22, 1991 at about 3:00 o’clock early dawn at Marcos
cortege as evidenced by a receipt issued by the Green Hills Memorial Homes Bridge, Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
which is marked as Exhibit “H” and another P9,300.00 as interment fee as shown Honorable Court, the above-named accused with intent to kill and with treachery
in the receipt issued by the Divine Shepherd Memorial Gardens, Inc. which is and with evident premeditation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and
marked as Exhibit “I.” She also spent “about P5,000.00 or more” for a one (1) feloniously chased, bumped and hit the motorela which Wilfredo S. Achumbre
week vigil, but no receipt was presented; hence, the same cannot be included in was riding with his Ceres Kia automobile bearing Plate No. 722 and as a
the award for actual damages. A party is entitled to compensation only for such consequence thereof, the motorela was dragged and fell on the road causing the
pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. The amount of “not less driver (Felipe Requerme) and its passenger Rosita Requerme to sustain serious
than P2,000.00” allegedly spent during the 40th day cannot likewise be bodily injuries while the deceased Wilfredo S.
considered as the same was incurred after a considerable lapse of time from the _______________
burial of the victim. Hence, only the total amount of P16,300.00 as actual
1
damages should be awarded to the heirs of the deceased. Composed of Justices Arturo B. Buena (now Associate Justice of the
Same; Medical expenses are in the nature of actual damages which should Supreme Court), Angelina Sandoval Gutierrez (ponente) and Conrado M.
be duly proved and the award for actual damages cannot be made on the basis Vasquez, Jr.
of the doctor’s prescriptions alone.—– Anent the amount of P1,000.00
representing medical expenses awarded to the spouses Felipe and Rosita 513
Requerme, the prosecution presented the doctor’s prescription marked as VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 513
 People vs. Enguito area in front of Wheels Marketing. Because of the violent push the motorela
Achumbre was able to run towards the railings at Marcos Bridge but accused turned around facing the direction from where it came from and fell on its right
with intent to kill him hit instantaneously immediately rammed and hit him with side.
his driven vehicle cutting his right leg and thereafter ran over him thereby Felipe Requerme screamed for help thinking that his wife was pinned
causing mortal harm on his body which was the direct and immediate cause of underneath. A tamaraw pick-up stopped near them and he immediately informed
his instantaneous death. that they were intentionally hit by the white vehicle. A short time later a police
That the wrong done in the commission of the crime was deliberately mobile patrol arrived and with the assistance of the people around, they pushed
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission. the motorela to return it to its natural position. Requerme and his wife were
Contrary to Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to paragraphs brought to the Operation Kahusay ug Kalinaw (OKK), a 24-hour police station
13 and 21 of Article 14 thereof.”2 where all victims of crimes report in Cagayan de Oro. At the OKK the driver of
the white service pick-up who bumped his motorela arrived. Requerme identified
Upon arraignment, accused, assisted by counsel, pleaded not guilty to the crime the driver as Thadeos Enguito whom he pointed inside the courtroom. Later,
charged.3 Requerme and his wife were brought to the city hospital for medical check-up.
Trial ensued. The prosecution presented the following witnesses: Felipe They were also brought to the Northern Mindanao Regional Training Hospital to
Requerme, Rosita Requerme, PO3 Ricardo Catiil, SPO1 Albert Calingasan, PO3 identify the deceased. The following day the Requerme spouses went to the
Virgilio Maquiling, SPO1 Franklin Alamban, Sr., Georgita Achumbre, Dr. police station and executed their affidavits which are attached to the record.
Sofronio Sescon and Dr. Apolinar Vacalares. The defense presented Alberto Felipe Requerme presented a medical certificate issued by the examining
Chaves, Anita Enguito and the accused himself. physician to establish the injuries he suffered (Exh. “A” ). Likewise, he presented
In his brief, accused-appellant states that he is in conformity with the prescription for medicines and he said that he spent a total amount of P1,000.00
findings of facts of the court a quo4 which we quote hereunder: (Exhs. “B,” “B-1,” “B-2,” “B-3”).
“Prosecution’s Evidence: Rosita Requerme was riding along with her husband and she noticed that
when they were near the Sacred Heart of Jesus Montessori School their motorela
From the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Felipe Requerme, Rosita was bumped by a white motor vehicle. She observed that the face of the driver of
Requerme, PO3 Ricardo Catiil, SPO1 Albert Calingasan, PO3 Virgilio the vehicle bumping them was bloody. Mrs. Requerme shouted and waved her
Maquiling, SPO1 Franklin Alamban, Sr., complainant Georgita Achumbre, wife hand signalling the driver to stop but the driver kept pushing the motorela
of the deceased, Dr. Sofronio Sescon and Dr. Apolinar Vacalares, it was violently. The push was so fast and strong that the motorela was already
established that at about 3:00 o’clock dawn of September 22, 1991, Felipe uncontrolled and running very fast. Their passenger jumped out when they were
Requerme, a motorela driver who while driving his motorela with his wife on already at the Marcos bridge near the Wheels Marketing. Then the motorela
board, from Lapasan towards Poblacion, Cagayan de Oro City, picked up a made a 180 degrees turn facing the direction where they came from and fell on
passenger near the Nazareno church. The passenger was later identified as the its right side. Struggling out of the motorela she noticed that the white vehicle
_______________ went up the elevated catwalk or pathway pursuing Achumbre who was hit when
he
2
p. 3, Records of Criminal Case No. 91-1090.
3
Order dated November 8, 1991, p. 33, ibid. 515
4
p. 1, Appellant’s Brief, p. 8, Rollo. VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 515
People vs. Enguito
514
was already at the railing (barandilla). Then she observed that the white vehicle
514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED drove across the bridge towards Iligan City. At the OKK she saw the accused
People vs. Enguito brought by policemen and she asked him why he bumped them and the accused
deceased, Engr. Wilfredo Achumbre. Achumbre asked him to bring him across answered “I have to do it Manang because look at me now” (TSN, Dec. 16,
the Marcos bridge towards his home. After travelling a distance of 300 meters 1991). She also observed that the face of the accused was bleeding. She
more or less and near the Sacred Heart of Jesus Montessori School, Requerme’s identified the accused in court, as the same person she saw at the OKK. She was
motorela was bumped by a white motor vehicle. The vehicle kept pushing the treated at the hospital and was issued a medical certificate (Exh. “C”). Together
motorela causing it to run very fast for the next 400 meters until it reached the with her husband, they spent P1,000.00 for medicines.
 PO3 Ricardo Catiil was assigned as driver of the mobile division patrol no. paramedic. They immediately brought the body of the victim to the NMRTH.
07 on September 22, 1991 together with SPO1 Albert Calingasan and Armando Maquiling inspected the crime scene and he observed that the latex paint of the
Mana. They parked the mobile car at the other end of the Marcos bridge along C. railing was scraped and the trailing was dented.
M. Recto Avenue at about 2:30 in the morning. Shortly thereafter, he saw a car Dr. Sofronio Sescon identified the medical certificate and he described his
coming from Cagayan de Oro poblacion crossing the bridge running fast with a findings as follows:
damage on its right portion. He estimated the speed at 80 kph. Observing “October 19, 1991
something unusual they pursued the vehicle, switched on their siren and caught
up with the vehicle at Km. 3, 2.6 kilometers from the place of incident. Catiil and MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
the other two policemen alighted from the car and accosted the driver and
brought him to the OKK. He noticed that the face of the driver was bleeding TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
which he believed may have been caused by the splintered windshield.
Examining the vehicle, they noticed that in addition to the broken windshield, the THIS IS TO CERTIFY that MR. FELIPE REQU(I)ERME, 42 years old, of
right portion of the signal light and the head light were also damaged. The right Consolacion, Cagayan de Oro City was examined by the undersigned in this
front tire was flat. When asked, the driver admitted that he bumped someone at hospital on September 22, 1991 at about 3:12 A.M. for:
the Marcos bridge. “Abrasions, about 2x4 cm. and 0.5 x 2 cm., with hematoma, Right lumbar
SPO1 Albert Calingasan, supporting the testimony of Ricardo Catiil who was area.”
the driver of the mobile patrol car 07, declared that they were at the middle of the
Marcos bridge when they saw a Ceres Kia car running fast and they pursued it =======================================
until it stopped at Km. 3. After delivering the accused at the OKK, Calingasan
together with his two companions drove back to the place of incident. They saw Healing Period: Two (2) weeks barring complications.
blood on the street. There were also bits of human flesh found on the cemented This certificate is issued for whatever purpose it may serve.
road and the right leg was completely severed. Calingasan explained that when (SGD.) SOFRONIO C. SESCON, M.D.
they followed at the hospital and viewed the body of the victim, they saw that the Medical Officer”
right leg was severed from the body.
PO3 Virgilio Maquiling was assigned with mobile patrol 05 of the Cagayan 517
de Oro Police Station at about 2:00 o’clock dawn of September 22, 1991. They VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 517
were on patrol near the Golez residence almost near the foot of the Marcos People vs. Enguito
bridge facing Iligan City. Dr. Rogelio Gannaban examined Rosita Requerme at about 3:00 o’clock dawn of
Sept. 22, 1991 and he issued a medical certificate (Exh. “C”) indicating the
516
following injuries:
516 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED “October 19, 1991
People vs. Enguito
Maquiling and his companions saw a Ceres Kia coming from Liceo de Cagayan MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
and turned right at the bridge and went towards the place where the incident
occurred. Maquiling observed that the way the vehicle was driven, the driver TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
may have been drunk. Twenty minutes later, the same vehicle came back with its
right portion damaged. Suspecting that something untoward may have occurred, THIS IS TO CERTIFY that MRS. ROSITA REQU(I)-ERME, 41 years old, of
he called mobile patrol 101 to intercept the vehicle. Not long after a PU driver Consolacion, Cagayan de Oro City was examined by the undersigned in this
informed Maquiling and his companions that a motorela was involved in a traffic hospital on September 22, 1991 at about 3:12 a.m. for:
accident at the other end of the bridge near Licoan Bakery and Restaurant.      - Contusion 2.0 x 6.0 cm. Right arm, M/3, medial;
Proceeding to the place of incident, he saw a body of a person at Abellanosa      - Contusion 3.0 x 4.0 cm. Right leg, P/3, anterior
Street which is located immediately below the bridge about 10 feet high. He also
saw that the right leg of the person was hanging at the Marcos bridge railing ==================================
about seven meters away from the body. Maquiling, using his radio, called the
 HEALING PERIOD: Three to Five (3-5) days barring complications. “x x x
This certificate is issued for whatever purpose it may serve. A With this drawing with multiple injuries on the leg, it could have fall
(SGD.) ROGELIO R. GANNABAN, M. D.
Medical Officer IV” . from a certain height fifty feet or twenty feet but not from five feet height
or even ten feet height.” (TSN, Dec. 19, 1991, p. 21)
Dr. Apolinar Vacalares, chief of the Pathology Department of the NMRTH Dr. Vacalares declared that the victim suffered massive hemorrhage and, in
identified the death certificate of Wilfredo Achumbre (Exhs. “D,” “D-1”). He fact, it was impossible for the victim to survive even with the most modern
conducted an autopsy on the cadaver of Wil-fredo Achumbre and the following medical attendance. There was massive accumulation of clot and no amount of
are his external findings: surgery could have saved the victim. Death was almost instantaneous.
Georgita Achumbre, wife of the deceased, declared that her husband used to
“x x x receive P5,000.00 monthly salary and with other incentives, giving him a total
Prosecutor Gamotin: income of P10,000.00 a month. They have 5 children namely: Charles Ian (9 yrs.
Q Now, you made mention that you were the one who conducted on the old.), Lou Aiza (6 yrs. old), Charmie Aimee (3 yrs. old), Charlene Irene (1 yr.
cause of death of the victim on this particular case—–will you please tell and 10 mos. old), and Christine Ivy Lou (6 mos. old).
the honorable court what was your findings on the victim? 519
A On the autopsy table the external findings are—–1) There was a VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 519
laceration of the forehead and contusions on the left forehead, and 2) People vs. Enguito
Multiple injuries on the head and right extremity, traumatic.” (TSN, Dec. Georgita Achumbre knows the accused because he used to come to their house
19, 1991, p. 9) and he and her husband were both employed with G & P Builders and they used
x x x” to play basketball together. At 5:00 o’clock in the morning of September 22,
518 1991 she received news of her husband’s death. Together with her brother-in-law
she proceeded to the NMRTH and saw the body of her husband lying on a table
518 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
and covered with white cloth. She was informed that her husband was dead on
People vs. Enguito arrival. From the hospital she went to the police station to retrieve the wallet of
He also presented an autopsy table showing a diagram of the humanbody her husband which contained P3,000.00. When she confronted the accused at the
showing therein the injuries suffered by the victim (Exhs. “E,”“El,” “E-2”). In police station why he killed her husband, Thadeos Enguito answered that he was
examining the body he saw that the right leg wascut at the upper third just below mauled by her husband and it was an act of revenge. The accused explained that
the knee. In the diagram of thehuman body he identified the injuries on the brain the victim became angry when he was made to pay the bills of Enguito’s friend
(Exhs. “E-5,” “E-6,” “E-7,” “E-8”). The complete findings of Dr. Vacalares are who was seated on the other table.
as follow: Expenses she incurred as a result of her husband’s death are the following:
“x x x
Prosecutor Gamotin: 1. 1)P 7,000.00 for the Greenhills Funeral Homes;
Q Now, what was your findings on the brain of the victim in this case? 2. 2)P 9,000.00 for Divine Shepherd Memorial Park;
A In opening the brain or the skull, there were blood clots on the external 3. 3)P 5,000.00 for vigil and prayers for 10 days;
4. 4)P 2,000.00 for the 40th day prayer; and
portion of the covering portion and below the distal portion or surface, 5. 5)P20,000.00 attorney’s fees.
again there was a blood clot and then the thin membrane that covers the
brain is also covered with blood. She leaves to the discretion of the Court the moral and exemplary damages.
Q You mean to tell this honorable court hemorrhage on the brain?
A There was a massive hemorrhage.” (TSN, Dec. 19, 1991, p. 12) Defendant’s Evidence:
When asked by the defense counsel regarding a fall from a certain height which
would result to a damage of the brain, Dr. Vacalares answered: Maintaining that the death of the victim was purely an accident, accused
Thadeos Enguito, a co-employee of the victim, declared that he and the deceased
Wilfredo Achumbre were close friends and they used to play basketball together. confrontation, Mrs. Achumbre asked Enguito why he killed her husband and he
He is also acquainted with the wife of the victim because he used to go to their explained that it was not intentional (TSN, May 18, 19, pp. 26-27).
residence. Enguito maintained that on September 22 at about 3:00 o’clock in the On Cross-examination the accused claimed that the bumper of the Ceres Kia
morning he was about to bring Achumbre to his house located at Kauswagan hit the back portion of the motorela. He also maintained that other than the driver
near Kong Hua School. Enguito was driving a Ceres Kia ‘pick-up owned by there was a woman passenger together with Achumbre. He affirmed that
G & P Builders Construction. At the crossroad going to the house of Achumbre, Achumbre having mauled him and bloodied his face he was very angry with the
he (Achumbre) refused to step down, compelling Enguito to go back to where latter.
they came from at Divisoria. Enguito observed that Achumbre was already
drunk. Achumbre invited Enguito to eat bulalo but the latter refused and because 521
Achumbre still refused to alight from the pick-up, Enguito decided to go home to VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 521
his residence at Gaabucayan-Osmena Extension passing by the Coca-Cola plant. People vs. Enguito
Nearing the house of Enguito, Enguito saw the woman waiving at him to stop but he still continued to very
closely follow even hitting the motorela. The accused did not apply the brake
520
because he was afraid that his vehicle might turn turtle. Asked why he did not
520 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED stop his vehicle after hitting the deceased he explained that there were people
People vs. Enguito gathered from the distance and he was afraid that he might be harmed by them.
Achumbre suddenly stepped on the brakes and attempted to take over the When again asked why he did not stop at the middle of the bridge, he said that he
vehicle. The Ceres Kia stopped and Enguito quickly jumped out and ran towards already saw the mobile patrol and he directly went to them.
his house with Achumbre pursuing him. After a short while Achumbre was able As character witness the accused presented Alberto Chaves, 76 years old,
to catch up with Enguito and he (Achumbre) said, “You are a braggart” (TSN, former mayor of Kalilangan, Bukidnon where the accused grew up. Mr. Chaves
May 18, 1992, p. 17) and mauled him. Enguito failed to put up a fight because was former superintendent of the defunct NARRA and in 1964 he was municipal
Achumbre was very much bigger having a height of approximately 5’11.” mayor of Pangantucan, an adjoining municipality of Kalilangan. He was also
Achumbre’s blows resulted to Enguito’s dizziness and when his mind was elected municipal mayor of Kalilangan in 1968 up to 1986. He knew very well
cleared, he noticed that Achumbre already left. The Ceres Kia pick-up which the accused Thadeos Enguito as a young boy. The father of the accused was a
Achumbre wanted to take away from him was left parked near Enguito. construction foreman in the municipal government where he was mayor and the
Accused Enguito drove back the Ceres Kia in order to report the incident to wife was employed with the NARRA assigned under the health services. During
the police authorities. Turning towards Recto Avenue he saw a motorela which all the years when the accused was residing in Kalilangan, Bukidnon he was
had Achumbre as passenger cruising along Recto Avenue a little beyond the never involved in any crime. As far as he knows, he is a good boy and this
Nazareno Church. Enguito followed the motorela with intentions of compelling charge against him (Enguito) is a complete surprise to him.
Achumbre to surrender to the police having observed earlier that a police mobile Anita Enguito, wife of the accused, testified that they have been married for
patrol was parked at the other end of the Marcos bridge. Still very closely nine years and they have four children, the eldest being 9 years old and the
following the motorela, Achumbre suddenly jumped towards the right of the youngest 3 years old. As far as she can remember the deceased Wilfredo
Ceres Kia and when he attempted to cross the road towards Wheels Marketing he Achumbra and her husband were good friends and she did not know of any
was hit (TSN, May 18, 1992, pp. 23-24). Enguito attempted to apply the brakes quarrel that transpired between them.”5
but it was so sudden and Achumbre was too near. Without verifying what
happened to Achumbre, Enguito drove on across the bridge passing by a patrol After trial, the court a quo rendered judgment on October 5, 1992 finding
car and stopping near the Km. 3 at a distance of 1.7 kilometers beyond the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Homicide with Less
mobile patrol parked at the foot of the other side of the bridge towards Iligan Serious Physical Injuries. The dispositive portion6 of which reads:
City. “IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court is of the considered opinion and so
In trying to avoid hitting Achumbre, the Ceres Kia hit the railings damaging holds that the prosecution clearly established beyond reasonable doubt that the
the windshield, the right front headlight and the right siding of the vehicle. crime of homicide with less serious physical injuries was committed by the
Noticing the police car pursuing him, Enguito stopped his vehicle and accused Thadeos Enguito
approached the policemen. He was brought to the OKK where he was informed ________________
that Achumbre was killed. On September 23 at the police station during the
 5
 pp. 2-14, RTC-Decision, pp. 161-173, Record of Criminal Case No. 91- ________________
1090.
6 7
 pp. 21-22, thereof, pp. 180-181, ibid. p. 12 thereof, Rollo of Criminal Case No. 14057.

522 523
522 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 523
People vs. Enguito People vs. Enguito
with the aggravating circumstance of the use of motor vehicle (Art. 14, par. 20,
RPC) without any mitigating circumstance and hereby sentences him to an 1. “2.The Honorable Third Division of the Court of Appeals
indeterminate sentence ranging from TWELVE (12) YEARS of prision committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the
correccional as minimum to TWENTY (20) YEARS of reclusion temporal as conviction of accused for the Crime of Murder with the use of
maximum penalty. motor vehicle.”
On the civil liability, the accused is hereby ordered to pay the following:
In the first assigned error, accused-appellant avers that no evidence was
1. 1)P 50,000.00 representing death compensation; presented by the prosecution to show that the motorela driven by Felipe
2. 2)P 23,000.00 representing funeral expenses; Requerme suffered any damage as a result of the alleged bumping. Appellant
3. 3)P200,000.00 representing moral and exemplary damages; argues that the motorela turned on its left side in a reverse direction because of
4. 4)P 20,000.00 attorney’s fee. the act of Felipe who was not able to balance the motorela when the deceased
Achumbre jumped out from the rear. Appellant contends that he could not be
The accused is likewise ordered to pay spouses Felipe and Rosita Requerme guilty of any physical injuries suffered by the spouses Requerme because the
the following: direct cause of the motorela turning on its left side was the act of Felipe in
guiding the vehicle while the proximate cause is the thrust which resulted when
1. 1)P 1,000.00 representing medical expenses; Achumbre suddenly jumped out of the motorela.
2. 2)P30,000.00 representing moral and exemplary damages.” The argument is devoid of merit. The defense disregards the basic rule in
criminal law that a person is responsible for all the consequences of his unlawful
On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that since the prosecution’s evidence or wrongful act although such consequences were different from those which he
showed that accused killed the victim by means of motor vehicle, he should be originally intended.8 Even if it be assumed that the real intention of accused-
guilty of the crime of murder and not of homicide. The dispositive portion 7 of the appellant was to surrender the victim to the police for mauling him, his act of
Decision dated October 17, 1996 reads: pursuing the victim, who was a passenger of the motorela, resulted in the injuries
“WHEREFORE, the appealed decision is hereby AFFIRMED with the of the driver and the other passenger of the motorela. Appellant himself
following modification: appellant Thadeos Enguito is hereby found guilty testified9 that when he followed the motorela, he was “very near” 10 and that he
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER WITH LESS SERIOUS saw the deceased Achumbre jump out on the right side of the motorela but he
PHYSICAL INJURIES and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion went ahead; he allegedly “tried to evade, but he was so near.” 11 Upon seeing that
Perpetua. Pursuant to Section 13 (par. 2) of Rule 124 of the Revised Rules on Achumbre was trying to jump out of the motorela, accused-appellant should have
Criminal Procedure, let this case be certified and the entire records thereof be known that by closely following, pushing and bumping the motorela, he could
elevated to the Supreme Court for review. Costs against the appellant.” injure the pas-
________________
Accused-appellant filed his brief raising the following assignment of errors:
8
 Article 4, Revised Penal Code; People vs. Cruza, 237 SCRA 410.
9
1. “1.The Honorable Third Division of the Court of Appeals  p. 22, TSN, May 18, 1992.
10
committed error in finding that accused is guilty of less  pp. 22 & 39, TSN, May 18, 1992.
11
serious physical injuries suffered by Felipe Requerme.  p. 24, ibid.
524
524 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED voluntary surrender; and had the charge been homicide he could have pleaded
guilty. We find that these mitigating circumstances cannot be appreciated in his
People vs. Enguito
favor. Accused-appellant was allegedly “still very angry” 19 while he was
sengers, which is what happened in this case. Moreover, accused-appellant
following, bumping and pushing the motorela which was in front of him. He was
ignored the pleas of Rosita Requerme, the other passenger and wife of the driver
previously mauled by the deceased and he was allegedly rendered unconscious
of the motorela, for him to stop bumping and pushing the motorela. 12 Instead, he
by the blows inflicted on him. When he regained consciousness, he claims that
persisted resulting in the motorela turning on its side and in the opposite
he wanted to look for a policeman to report that he was mauled. 20 Clearly,
direction. Verily, the act of accused-appellant in relentlessly pursuing the
accused-appellant’s state of mind after he was mauled and before he crushed
motorela is a manifestation of his intention to perpetrate the crime.
Achumbre to death was such that he was still able to act reasonably. In fact, he
Appellant further contends that he did not intentionally choose the motor
admitted having seen a police mobile patrol nearby but instead, he chose to resort
vehicle he was driving as a means of committing the offense, and that at most,
to the dastardly act which resulted in the death of Achumbre and in the injuries
the vehicle was the only available means to stop the deceased from escaping. He
of the spouses Requerme. For passion to be considered as a mitigating
argues that it was his intention to apprehend and surrender the deceased to the
circumstance, facts must be proved to show causes sufficient to produce loss of
police for his previous act of mauling him but in the process, he killed the
self-control and to overcome reason.21 The turmoil and unreason which naturally
deceased.
result from a quarrel or fight should not be confused with the sentiment or
The indictment against accused-appellant is murder attended by the use of
excitement in the mind of a person injured or offended to such a degree as to
motor vehicle. The use of a motor vehicle qualifies the killing to murder if the
deprive him of his sanity and self-control.22
same was perpetrated by means thereof. 13 Appellant’s claim that he merely used
The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender cannot be appreciated.
the motor vehicle, Kia Ceres van, to stop the victim from escaping is belied by
Evidence shows that accused-appellant was further pursued by the police.
his actuations. By his own admission, he testified that there was a police mobile
Appellant himself testified that he stopped his vehicle just after the police mobile
patrol near the crossing.14 Accused-appellant could have easily sought the
stopped but admitted having “stopped farther than the police mobile.” 23
assistance of the police instead of taking the law into his own hands. Moreover,
________________
accused-appellant already noticed the deceased trying to jump out of the
motorela15 but he still continued his pursuit. He did not stop the vehicle after 18
 p. 53, TSN, May 18, 1992.
hitting the deceased16 who was hit when he (Achumbre) was at the railing of the 19
 p. 40, ibid.
Marcos bridge.17 Accused-appellant further used the vehicle in his attempt to 20
 p. 35, ibid.
escape. He was already more than one (1) kilometer away 21
 People vs. Mojica, 70 SCRA 502.
________________ 22
 People vs. Bautista, 254 SCRA 621.
23
12  p. 25, ibid.
 pp. 25-26, TSN, December 16, 1991; pp. 10-11, TSN, December 17, 1991;
pp. 40-41, TSN, May 18, 1992. 526
13
 People vs. Soriano, 134 SCRA 542. 526 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
14
 pp. 22, 39 & 42, TSN, May 18, 1992.
15
 p. 42, TSN, May 18, 1992. People vs. Enguito
16
 p. 48, ibid. SPO3 Catiil further testified that appellant did not surrender but only stopped his
17
 pp. 7-8, TSN, December 17, 1991. vehicle when its right tire was already flat.24 His testimony was corroborated by
PO3 Makiling who was patrolling the portion of Marcos Bridge. He testified that
525 he saw the vehicle being driven by accused-appellant already destroyed and the
VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 525 right portion of the vehicle a little bit lower as it was running flat. 25 Clearly,
accused-appellant could have eluded arrest but his situation became futile when
People vs. Enguito
his vehicle suffered a flat tire.
from the place of the incident when he stopped his vehicle upon seeing the police
The foregoing notwithstanding, the existence or nonexistence of a mitigating
mobile patrol which was following him.18
circumstance in the case at bar will not affect the penalty to be imposed pursuant
Appellant contends that he should have been convicted of the crime of
to Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code. The crime committed by accused-
homicide with two (2) mitigating circumstances of acting in passion and
appellant is the complex crime of murder with less serious physical injuries.
Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for a complex crime Georgita Achumbre, widow of the deceased-victim, testified that she spent
shall be the maximum period of the penalty for the most serious crime. The P7,000.00 for embalming and funeral cortege as evidenced by a receipt issued by
crime was committed in 1992 where the penalty for the crime of murder, which the Green Hills Memorial Homes which is marked as Exhibit “H” 34 and another
is the most serious crime, was reclusion temporal in its maximum period to P9,300.00 as interment fee as shown in the receipt issued by the Divine Shepherd
death under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. The death penalty being the Memorial Gardens, Inc. which is
maximum period of the penalty for murder should be imposed for the complex ________________
crime of murder with less serious physical injuries considering that under Article
29
63, an indivisible penalty cannot be affected by the presence of any mitigating or  Article 2230, Civil Code.
30
aggravating circumstance.26 And, consonant with the ruling in People vs.  pp. 28 & 38, TSN, January 9, 1992.
31
Muñoz27 that Article III, Section 19 (1) of the 1987 Constitution 28 did not change  People vs. Gutierrez, Jr., 302 SCRA 643; People vs. Sanchez, et al., G.R.
the period of the penalty for murder except only insofar as it prohibits the No. 118423, June 16, 1999, 308 SCRA 264; People vs. Silvestre, G.R. No.
imposition of the death 127573, May 12, 1999, 307 SCRA 68.
32
________________  People vs. Sanchez, et al., supra.
33
 People vs. Quilang, G.R. Nos. 123265-66, August 12, 1999, 312 SCRA
24
 p. 20, TSN, December 18, 1991. 314.
25 34
 pp. 6 & 11, TSN, January 9, 1992.  p. 36, TSN, January 9, 1992; p. 89, Record.
26
 People vs. Madali, 188 SCRA 69.
27
 170 SCRA 107. 528
28
 Sec. 19 (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or 528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, People vs. Enguito
for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter marked as Exhibit “I.”35 She also spent “about P5,000.00 or more” for a one (1)
provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion week vigil, but no receipt was presented;36 hence, the same cannot be included in
perpetua. the award for actual damages. 37 A party is entitled to compensation only for such
pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. 38 The amount of “not less
527
than P2,000.00” allegedly spent during the 40th day 39 cannot likewise be
VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 527 considered as the same was incurred after a considerable lapse of time from the
People vs. Enguito burial of the victim.40 Hence, only the total amount of P16,300.00 as actual
penalty and reduces it to reclusion perpetua, the Court of Appeals was correct in damages should be awarded to the heirs of the deceased.
imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The lower courts failed to consider the fact that under Article 2206 of the
There is a need to modify the award of damages to the heirs of the victim Civil Code, in addition to civil indemnity of P50,000.00 for the death of the
Achumbre. We affirm the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for death to victim, the accused-appellant is liable for the loss of earning capacity of the
the heirs of the deceased Achumbre. There is, however, no justification for the deceased and such indemnity should be paid to the heirs of the latter. The widow
award of exemplary damages there being no aggravating circumstance; 29 hence, of deceased Achumbre testified that before her husband died, he was working
the same should be deleted. with G & P Builders as a licensed civil engineer receiving salary and other
Anent the award of moral damages, his widow testified that she was sad and incentives in the amount of “more or less, a total of P10,000.00 a month” or a
worried for the children and their future and that there were nights that she gross annual income of P120,000.00. They had five (5) children. 41 At the time
cannot sleep.30 The award of moral damages in favor of the heirs of the deceased Achumbre died, he was 38 years old.42 The deceased’s loss of earning capacity is
Achumbre is in order, however, the amount should be reduced to P50,000.00 in computed as follows:
light of the purpose for making such award, which is to compensate the heirs for _______________
injuries to their feelings and not to enrich them.31
35
As to the award of actual damages, the same cannot be based on the  p. 90, Record.
36
allegation of a witness without any competent document to support such  p. 37, TSN, January 9, 1992.
37
claim.32 Proof is required to be adequately supported by receipts.33 The amount of  People vs. Naguita, G.R. No. 130091, August 30, 1999, 313 SCRA 292.
38
P23,000.00 awarded by the trial court as funeral expenses should be reduced.  Article 2219, Civil Code.
 39
 p. 37, TSN, January 9, 1992. thereof. Likewise the award of exemplary damages to the spouses Requerme
40
 People vs. Mangahas, G.R. No. 118777, July 28, 1999, 311 SCRA 384. should be deleted for lack of basis.
41
 p. 25, TSN, January 9, 1992. WHEREFORE, the decision convicting accused-appellant Thadeos Enguito
42
 Exhibit “D,” p. 82, Record. of the complex crime of Murder with Less Serious Physical Injuries and
sentencing him to the penalty of reclusion perpetua is hereby AFFIRMED with
529 the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of
VOL. 326, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 529 deceased Wilfredo Achumbre the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity;
People vs. Enguito P1,680,000.00 for loss of earning capacity; P16,300.00 as actual damages;
net = life expectancy x gross less living P50,000.00 as moral damages;
_______________
earning       annual expenses
capacit       income (50% of 43
Article 2219, Civil Code.
44
y GAI) pp. 77-80, Record.
(x)       (GAI)  
530
x 2 (80 - ace at time x (GAI -    
530 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
of death) 50% of
People vs. Lomerio
GAI)
and to further pay the spouses Felipe and Rosita Requerme the amount of
  3         P20,000.00 as moral damages.
  = 2(80-38) x (P120,000.00 -   SO ORDERED.
P60,000.00)      Melo (Chairman),  Vitug, Panganiban and Purisima, JJ., concur.
    3       Judgment affirmed with modification as to civil indemnity.
  = 28 x P60,000.00       Notes.—–A malefactor who committed attempted homicide with respect to
  = P 1,680,000.00       one victim and consummated homicide with respect to another when he fired a
Pursuant to Article 2202 of the Civil Code, accused-appellant is liable for all shot committed two grave felonies with one single act and, accordingly, would
damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission be liable for a complex crime in the nature of a delito compuesto, or a compound
complained of. Moral damages are recoverable since the criminal offense crime. (People vs. Macagaling, 237 SCRA 299 [1994])
resulted in physical injuries43 of the spouses Requerme. The total amount of Where the case involves the killing of persons other than the intended
P20,000.00 as moral damages in favor of the spouses Requerme is believed to be victims, the same is better characterized as error in personae or mistake in the
reasonable. identity of the victims, rather than aberratio ictus which means mistake in the
Anent the amount of P1,000.00 representing medical expenses awarded to blow, characterized by aiming at one but hitting the other due to imprecision in
the spouses Felipe and Rosita Requerme, the prosecution presented the doctor’s the blow. (People vs. Sabalones, 294 SCRA 751 [1998])
prescription marked as Exhibits “B” to “B-3” 44 but no receipts were presented.
Medical expenses are in the nature of actual damages which should be duly —–—–o0o—–—–
proved and the award for actual damages cannot be made on the basis of the
doctor’s prescriptions alone. There must be evidence of the actual amount