1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

ENBANC

[G.R.No.131588.March27,2001]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs. GLENN DE LOS SANTOS,

accusedappellant.
DECISION
DAVIDE,JR.,C.J.:

OnemayperhapseasilyrecallthegruesomeandtragiceventinCagayandeOroCity,reportedoverprint
andbroadcastmedia,whichclaimedthelivesofseveralmembersofthePhilippineNationalPolice(PNP)who
wereundergoinganendurancerunaspartoftheSpecialCounterInsurgencyOperationUnitTraining.Notmuch
effortwassparedforthesearchoftheoneresponsibletherefor,ashereinaccusedappellantGlenndelosSantos
(hereafterGLENN)immediatelysurrenderedtolocalauthorities.GLENNwasthenchargedwiththecrimesof
MultipleMurder,MultipleFrustratedMurder,andMultipleAttemptedMurderinaninformationfiledwiththe
RegionalTrialCourtofCagayandeOroCity.Theinformationreadsasfollows:
ThatonoraboutOctober05,1995,intheearlymorning,atMaitumHighway,withinBarangayPuerto,Cagayan
deOroCity,Philippines,andwithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,with
deliberateintenttokill,takingadvantageofhisdrivenmotorvehicle,anIsuzuElf,andwithtreachery,didthen
andtherewillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslykillandinflictmortalwoundsfrombehindinasuddenand
unexpectedmannerwiththeuseofsaidvehiclemembersofthePhilippineNationalPolice(PNP),undergoinga
SpecialTrainingCourse(ScoutClass0795),wearingblackTshirtsandblackshortpants,performingan
EnduranceRunof35kilometerscomingfromtheircampinManoloFortich,Bukidnon,headingtoRegional
TrainingHeadquartersinCampAlagar,CagayandeOroCity,runninginacolumnof3,withadistanceoftwo
feet,moreorless,fromonetraineetoanother,thusforminga[sic]threelines,withalengthofmoreorless50
metersfromthe1stmantothelastman,unabletodefendthemselves,becausetheaccusedranormovedhis
drivenvehicleonthedirectionofthebacksofthePNPjoggersinspiteofthecontinuouswarningsignalsmade
bysixofthejoggers,namely:PO1AllanTabaconEspana,WaldonSindaSacro,LemuelYbanezPangca,
ArtemioJamilVillaflor,NardoOmasasCollantesandJoselitoBuyserEscartin,whowereattherearechelonof
saidrun,actingasguards,bycontinuouslywavingtheirhandsattheaccusedforhimtotaketheleftlaneofthe
highway,goingtotheCityproper,fromadistanceof100metersawayfromthejoggersrearportion,butwhich
accusedfailedandrefusedtoheedinstead,heproceededtooperatehisdrivenvehicle(anIsuzuElf)onhigh
speeddirectlytowardsthejoggers,thusforcingtherearguard[s]tothrowthemselvesto[a]nearbycanal,to
avoidinjuries,thenhitting,bumping,orrammingthefirstfour(4)victims,causingthebodiestobethrown
towardsthewindshieldsofsaidIsuzuElf,breakingsaidwindshield,anduponbeingawarethatbodiesofthe
victimsflewonthewindshieldofhisdrivenvehicle,insteadofapplyinghisbrake,continuedtotravelonahigh
speed,thistimeputtingoffitsheadlights,thushittingthesucceedingjoggersonsaid1stline,asaresultthereof
thefollowingwerekilledonthespot:
1.VincentLabisRosal7.AntonioFloresLasco
2.AllanAmoguisAbis8.IgmedioSalinasLituanas
3.JoseArdenM.Atisa9.RobertoCabussaoLoren
4.NathanielMugotBaculio10.RaulPlazaMartinez
5.RomilGosilaLegrano11.JerryPedrosaPajo
6.ArnulfoLimbagoJacutin12.RolandoParemcioPancito
Whileanothertrainee/victim,AntonioPalominoMino,diedfewdaysaftertheincident,whilethefollowing
eleven(11)othertrainee/victimswereseriouslywounded,theaccusedthusperformingalltheactsofexecution
whichwouldproducethecrimeofMurderasaconsequencebutneverthelessdidnotproduceitbyreasonof
somecauseotherthansaidaccusedsspontaneousdesistance,thatis,bythetimelyandablemedicalassistance
renderedonthefollowingvictimswhichpreventedtheirdeath,towit:
1.ReyGoBoquis7.MelchorHinlo
2.ReneTuakoCalabria8.NoelGanzanOclarit
3.NonataIbarraErno9.CharitoPenzaGepala
4.ReyTamayoEstofil10.VictorMalicseOlavo
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

1/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

5.JoelReyMigueGalendez11.BimboGlabePolboroza
6.ArmanNeriHernaiz
WhilethefollowingPoliceOfficersI(POI)sustainedminorinjuries,towit:
1.RomanitoAndrada6.RomualdoCotorDacera
2.RichardCanoyCaday7.RamilRivasGaisano
3.ReyCayusa8.DibangkitaMagandang
4.AvelinoChua9.MartinOliveroPelarion
5.HenryGadisCoubeta10.FlordicanteMartinPiligro
afterwhichsaidaccusedthereafterescapedfromthesceneoftheincident,leavingbehindthevictimsafore
enumeratedhelpless.
ContrarytoArticle248,inrelationtoArticle6oftheRevisedPenalCode.
TheevidencefortheprosecutiondisclosethattheSpecialCounterInsurgencyOperationUnitTrainingheld
atCampDamilag,ManoloFortich,Bukidnon,startedon1September1995andwastoendon15October1995.
ThelastphaseofthetrainingwastheendurancerunfromsaidCamptoCampAlagar,CagayandeOroCity.The
run on 5 October 1995 started at 2:20 a.m. The PNP trainees were divided into three columns: the first and
secondofwhichhad22traineeseach,andthethirdhad21.ThetraineeswerewearingblackTshirts,blackshort
pants,andgreenandblackcombatshoes.Atthestartoftherun,aHummervehicletailedthejoggingtrainees.
When they reached Alae, the driver of the Hummer vehicle was instructed to dispatch advanced security at
strategiclocationsinCarmenHill.Sincethejoggingtraineeswereoccupyingtherightlaneofthehighway,two
rearsecurityguardswereassignedtoeachrearcolumn.Theirdutywastojogbackwardsfacingtheoncoming
vehiclesandgivehandsignalsforothervehiclestotaketheleftlane.[1]
ProsecutionwitnessesLemuelY.PangcaandWeldonSacrotestifiedthattheywereassignedasrearguards
ofthefirstcolumn.TheyrecalledthatfromAlaetoMaitumHighway,Puerto,CagayandeOroCity,about20
vehiclespassedthem,allofwhichsloweddownandtooktheleftportionoftheroadwhensignaledtodoso.[2]
WhiletheywerenegotiatingMaitumHighway,theysawanIsuzuElftruckcomingathighspeedtowards
them.The vehicle lights were in the high beam.At a distance of 100 meters, the rear security guards started
waving their hands for the vehicle to take the other side of the road, but the vehicle just kept its speed,
apparently ignoring their signals and coming closer and closer to them. Realizing that the vehicle would hit
them, the rear guards told their cotrainees to retract. The guards forthwith jumped in different directions.
LemuelandWeldonsawtheircotraineesbeinghitbythesaidvehicle,fallinglikedominoesoneaftertheother.
Some were thrown, and others were overrun by the vehicle. The driver did not reduce his speed even after
hittingthefirstandsecondcolumns.Theguardsthenstoppedoncomingvehiclestopreventtheircomradesfrom
beinghitagain.[3]
The trial court judge, together with the City Prosecutor, GLENN and his counsel, conducted an ocular
inspectionoftheplacewheretheincidenthappened.TheythenproceededtoinspecttheIsuzuElfatthepolice
station.TheCityProsecutormanifested,thus:
Thevehiclewhichwearenowinspectingatthepolicestationisthesamevehiclewhich[was]involvedinthe
October5,1995incident,anIsuzuElfvehiclecoloredlightbluewithstripspaintingalongthesidecolored
orangeandyellowaswellasinfront.Wefurthermanifestthatthewindshieldwastotallydamagedand2/3
portionofthefrontjustbelowthewindshieldwasheavilydentedasaconsequenceoftheimpact.Thelower
portionwaslikewisedamagedmoreparticularlyintheradiatorguard.Thebumperofsaidvehiclewaslikewise
heavilydamagedinfactthereisacutoftheplasticusedasabumperthattherightsideoftheheadlightwas
likewisetotallydamaged.Thefrontsignallight,rightsidewaslikewisedamaged.Thesidemirrorwaslikewise
totallydamaged.Theheightofthetruckfromthegroundtothelowerportionofthewindshieldis5ft.andthe
heightofthetruckonthefrontlevelis5ft.[4]
PO3JoseCabugwastestifiedthathewasassignedattheInvestigationDivisionatPrecinct6,Cagayande
OroCity,andthatat4a.m.of5October1995,severalmembersofthePNPcametotheirstationandreported
that they had been bumped by a certain vehicle. Immediately after receiving the report, he and two other
policemenproceededtothetrafficscenetoconductanocularinspection.Onlybloodstainsandbrokenparticles
ofthehitandrunvehicleremainedonthehighway.Theydidnotseeanybrakemarksonthehighway,which
ledhimtoconcludethatthebrakesofthevehiclehadnotbeenapplied.Thepolicemenmeasuredthebloodstains
andfoundthemtobe70ft.long.[5]
GLENNsversionoftheeventsthattranspiredthateveningisasfollows:
Atabout10:30p.m.of4October1995,hewasaskedbyhisfriendEntingGalindezandthelattersfellow
band members to provide them with transportation, if possible an Isuzu Forward, that would bring their band
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

2/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

instruments, band utilities and band members from Macasandig and Corrales, Cagayan de Oro City, to
Balingoan. From there, they were supposed to be taken to Mambajao, Camiguin, to participate in the San
MiguelsponsoredSabadoNightsoftheLanzonesFestivalfrom57October1995.Itwasthethirteenthtimethat
Entinghadaskedsuchafavorfromhim.[6]SincethearrangementwastofetchGalindezandhisgroupat4:00
a.m.of5October1995,GLENNimmediatelywenttoCugman,CagayandeOroCity,togethisIsuzuElftruck.
Afterwhich,heproceededbacktohishouseatBugo,CagayandeOroCity,andtoldhiswifethathewouldgo
toBukidnontogethisauntsIsuzuForwardtruckbecausethetwentybandmembersandnineutilitiesandband
instrumentscouldnotbeaccommodatedintheIsuzuElftruck.Threeofhisfriendsaskedtogoalong,namely,
RoldanPaltonag,AndotPea,andacertainAkut.[7]
After leaving GLENNs house, the group decided to stop at Celebrity Plaza Restaurant. GLENN saw his
kumpareDaniloCosinandthelatterswife,andjoinedthematthetable.GLENNfinishedthreebottlesofpale
pilsenbeer.WhentheCosinspousesleft,GLENNjoinedhistravellingcompanionsattheirtable.Thegroupleft
at 12:00 midnight for Bukidnon. The environment was dark and foggy, with occasional rains. It took them
sometime looking for the Isuzu Forward truck.Finally, they saw the truck in Agusan Canyon. Much to their
disappointment,thesaidtruckhadmechanicalproblems.Hence,GLENNdecidedtogobacktoCagayandeOro
CitytotellEntingthattheywouldusetheIsuzuElftruckinstead.[8]
GLENN drove slowly because the road was slippery. The vicinity was dark: there was no moon or star
neither were there lampposts. From the Alae junction, he and his companions used the national highway,
traversingtherightlanegoingtoCagayandeOroCity.AtthevicinityofMambatanganjunction,astheElfwas
negotiatingaleftcurvegoingslightlydownward,GLENNsawaverybrightandglaringlightcomingfromthe
opposite direction of the national highway. GLENN blinked his headlights as a signal for the other driver to
switchhisheadlightsfrombrighttodim.GLENNswitchedhisownlightsfrombrighttodimandreducedhis
speedfrom80to60kilometersperhour.Itwasonlywhenthevehicleswereatadistanceof10to15meters
fromeachotherthattheothercarsheadlightswereswitchedfrombrighttodim.Asaresult,GLENNfoundit
extremelyhardtoadjustfromhighbrightnesstosuddendarkness.[9]
It was while the truck was still cruising at a speed of 60 km./hr., and immediately after passing the
oncomingvehicle,thatGLENNsuddenlyheardandfeltbumpingthuds.Atthesoundofthefirstbumpingthuds,
GLENNputhisrightfootonthebrakepedal.Buttheimpactwassosuddenthathewasastonishedandafraid.
He wastremblingand could not see what were being bumped.At the succeeding bumping thuds, he was not
abletopumpthebrake, nor did he notice that his foot was pushing the pedal.He returnedtohissenses only
whenoneofhiscompanionswokeupandsaidtohim:Gard,itseemswebumpedonsomething.Justrelax,we
mightalldie.Duetoitsmomentum,theElfcontinuedonitstrackandwasabletostoponlywhenitwasalready
verynearthenextcurve.[10]
GLENNcouldnotdistinguishinthedarknesswhathehadhit,especiallysincetherightheadlightsofthe
truckhadbeenbusteduponthefirstbumpingthuds.Inhisconfusionandfear,heimmediatelyproceededhome.
GLENNdidnotreporttheincidenttothePuertoPoliceStationbecausehewasnotawareofwhatexactlyhehad
hit.Itwasonlywhenhereachedhishousethathenoticedthatthegrillofthetruckwasbrokenthesidemirror
androundmirror,missingandthewindshield,splintered.Twohourslater,heheardonBomboRadyothatan
accidenthadoccurred,andherealizedthatitwasthePNPgroupthathehadhit.GLENNsurrenderedthatsame
daytoGovernorEmano.[11]
The defense also presented Crescente Galindez, as well as Shirley Almazan of the PAGASA Office,
Cagayan de Oro City. The former testified that when he went to GLENNs house at about 10:00 p.m. of 4
October1995,therewasheavyrainandat12:00midnight,therainwasmoderate.HecorroboratedGLENNs
testimonythathe(Crescente)wenttoGLENNshousethateveninginordertohireatruckthatwouldbringthe
bandinstruments,bandutilitiesandbandmembersfromCagayandeOrotoCamiguinfortheLanzonesFestival.
[12] Almazan, on the other hand, testified that based on an observed weather report within the vicinity of
CagayandeOroCity,therewasrainfrom8:00p.m.ofOctober1995to2:00a.m.thenextdayandtheskywas
overcastfrom11:00p.m.of4October1995to5:00a.m.of5October1995.Whatshemeantbyovercastisthat
therewasnobreakintheskyand,definitely,themoonandstarscouldnotbeseen.[13]
TheprosecutionpresentedrebuttalwitnessDaniloOlaritawhosehousewasjust100metersawayfromthe
placewheretheincidentoccurred.Hetestifiedthathewasawakenedonthatfatefulnightbyaseriesofloud
thuds.Thereafter,amancametohishouseandaskedforaglassofwater,claimingtohavebeenhitbyavehicle.
Danilofurtherstatedthattheweatheratthetimewasfair,andthatthesoilwasdryandnotmuddy.[14]
In its decision of 26 August 1997, the trial court convicted GLENN of the complex crime of multiple
murder, multiple frustrated murder and multiple attempted murder, with the use of motor vehicle as the
qualifying circumstance. It sentenced him to suffer the penalty of death and ordered him to indemnify each
group of the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P75,000 each of the victims of frustrated murder in the
amountofP30,000andeachofthevictimsofattemptedmurderintheamountofP10,000.
Hence, this automatic review, wherein GLENN contends that the trial court erred (a) in finding that he
caused the Isuzu Elf truck to hit the trainees even after seeing the rear guards waving and the PNP trainees
jogging(b)infindingthathecausedthetrucktorunevenfasterafternoticingthefirstthudsand(c)infinding
thathecouldstillhaveavoidedtheaccidentfromadistanceof150meters,despitethebrightandglaringlight
fromtheoncomingvehicle.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

3/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

InconvictingGLENN,thetrialcourtfoundthattheaccusedoutofmischiefanddaredevilness[sic],inthe
exhilarationofthenightbreezeandhavingdr[u]nkatleastthreebottlesofbeerearlier,merelywantedtoscare
the rear guard[s] and see them scamper away as they saw him and his vehicle coming at them to ram them
down.[15]
Likewise,theOSGpositsthattheevilmotiveoftheappellantininjuringthejoggingtraineeswasprobably
broughtbythefactthathehaddr[u]nkatotalofthree(3)bottlesofbeerearlierbeforetheincident.[16]
Nottobeoutdone,thedefensealsoadvancesanotherspeculation,i.e.,thepossibilitythat[GLENN]could
havefallenasleepoutofsheerfatigueinthatunholyhourof3:30intheearlymorning,andthuswasnotableto
stophisIsuzuElftruckwhenthebumpingthudswereoccurringinrapidsuccessionandafterhewasableto
wakeupuponhearingtheshoutofhiscompanions,itwasalreadytoolate,asthebumpingthudshadalready
occurred.[17]
Consideringthatdeathpenaltyisinvolved,thetrialcourtshouldhavebeenmorescrupulousinweighingthe
evidence.IfwearetosubscribetothetrialcourtsfindingthatGLENNmusthavemerelywantedtoscarethe
rearguards,thenintenttokillwaswanting.Intheabsenceofacriminalintent,hecannotbeheldliableforan
intentionalfelony.Allreasonabledoubtintendedtodemonstratenegligence,andnotcriminalintent,shouldbe
indulged.[18]
Fromtheconvergenceofcircumstances,weareinclinedtobelievethatthetragiceventwasmoreaproduct
ofrecklessimprudencethanofamaliciousintentonGLENNspart.
First,astestifiedtobyprosecutionrebuttalwitnessDaniloOlarita,theplaceoftheincidentwasverydark,
astherewasnomoon.AndaccordingtoPAGASAsobservedweatherreportwithinthevicinityofCagayande
OroCitycoveringaradiusof50kilometers,atthetimetheeventtookplace,theskywasovercast,i.e., there
wasabsolutelynobreakinthethickcloudscoveringthecelestialdomeglobehence,therewasnowayforthe
moonandstarstobeseen.Neitherweretherelamppoststhatilluminatedthehighway.
Second, the jogging trainees and the rear guards were all wearing black Tshirts, black short pants, and
black and green combat shoes, which made them hard to make out on that dark and cloudy night. The rear
guardshadneitherreflectorizedvestsorglovesnorflashlightsingivinghandsignals.
Third,GLENNwasdrivingonthepropersideoftheroad,therightlane.On the other hand, the jogging
traineeswereoccupyingthewronglane,thesamelaneasGLENNsvehiclewastraversing.Worse, they were
facingthesamedirectionasGLENNstrucksuchthattheirbackswereturnedtowardstheoncomingvehicles
frombehind.
Fourth,noconvincingevidencewaspresentedtorebutGLENNstestimonythathehadbeenmomentarily
blinded by the very bright and glaring lights of the oncoming vehicle at the opposite direction as his truck
roundedthecurve.Hemusthavebeenstillreelingfromtheblindingeffectofthelightscomingfromtheother
vehiclewhenheplowedintothegroupofpolicetrainees.
Indeed,aspointedoutbyappellant,instincttellsonetostoporswervetoasafeplacethemomentheseesa
cow,dog,orcatontheroad,inordertoavoidbumpingorkillingthesameandmoresoiftheoneontheroadis
aperson.ItwouldthereforebeinconceivableforGLENN,thenayoungcollegegraduatewithapregnantwife
andthreeveryyoungchildrenwhoweredependentonhimforsupport,tohavedeliberatelyhitthegroupwith
histruck.
The conclusion of the trial court and the OSG that GLENN intentionally rammed and hit the jogging
trainees was premised on the assumption that despite the first bumping thuds, he continued to accelerate his
vehicleinsteadofapplyinghisbrakes,asshownbytheabsenceofbrakemarksorskidmarksalongthetraffic
scene.
Foritspart,thedefenseattributedthecontinuousmovementofGLENNsvehicletotheconfluenceofthe
followingfactors:
1. The Isuzu Elf truck, a huge vehicle, was moving fast that even if the brakes were applied the truck would
havestillproceededfurtheronaccountofitsmomentum,albeitatareducedspeed,andwouldhavestopped
onlyafteracertaindistance.
2.Thenationalhighway,fromAlaetoPuerto,CagayandeOroCity,wasmadeoffineandsmoothasphalt,free
fromobstructionsontheroadsuchaspotholesorexcavations.Moreover,thehighwaywasgoingalittlebit
downward,moreparticularlyfromthefirstcurvetotheplaceofincident.Hence,itwaseasierandfasterto
traverseadistanceof20to25meterswhichwastheapproximateaggregatedistancefromthefirstelements
uptothe22ndor23rdelementsofthecolumns.
3.Theweightofeachofthetrainees(theaverageofwhichcouldbe50kilogramsonly)couldhardlymakean
impact on the 3,900 kilograms truck, which was moving at a speed ranging from 60 to 70 kilometers per
hour.
4. Considering that the width of the truck from the right to the left tires was wide and the under chassis was
elevated,thetruckcouldjustpassovertwopersonslyingflatonthegroundwithoutitsrubbertiresrunning
overthebodies.Thus,GLENNwouldnotnoticeanydestabilizationoftherubbertires.
5. Since the police trainees were jogging in the same direction as the truck was proceeding, the forward
movements constituted a force parallel to the momentum of the forwardmoving truck such that there was
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

4/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

evenmuchlesserforceresistingthesaidongoingmomentum.

It is a wellentrenched rule that if the inculpatory facts are capable of two or more explanations one
consistentwiththeinnocenceorlesserdegreeofliabilityoftheaccused,andtheotherconsistentwithhisguilt
orgraverresponsibilitytheCourtshouldadopttheexplanationwhichismorefavorabletotheaccused.[19]
We are convinced that the incident, tragic though it was in light of the number of persons killed and
seriouslyinjured,wasanaccidentandnotanintentionalfelony.Itissignificanttonotethatthereisnoshredof
evidence that GLENN had an axe to grind against the police trainees that would drive him into deliberately
hittingthemwithintenttokill.
Althoughproofofmotive is not indispensable to a conviction especially wheretheassailantispositively
identified,suchproofis,nonetheless,importantindeterminingwhichoftwoconflictingtheoriesoftheincident
ismorelikelytobetrue.[20]Thus,inPeoplev.Godinez,[21]thisCourtsaidthattheexistenceofamotiveonthe
partoftheaccusedbecomesdecisiveindeterminingtheprobabilityorcredibilityofhisversionthattheshooting
waspurelyaccidental.
Neither is there any showing of a political angle of a leftistsponsored massacre of police elements
disguisedinavehicularaccident.[22]Eveniftherebesuchevidence,i.e.,thatthemotiveofthekillingwasin
furtherance of a rebellion movement, GLENN cannot be convicted because if such were the case, the proper
chargewouldberebellion,andnotmurder.[23]
GLENNsoffenseisinfailingtoapplythebrakes,ortoswervehisvehicletotheleftortoasafeplacethe
momentheheardandfeltthefirstbumpingthuds.Hadhedoneso,manytraineeswouldhavebeenspared.
Wehaveoncesaid:
Amanmustusecommonsense,andexerciseduereflectioninallhisactsitishisdutytobecautious,careful,
andprudent,ifnotfrominstinct,thenthroughfearofincurringpunishment.Heisresponsibleforsuchresultsas
anyonemightforeseeandforactswhichnoonewouldhaveperformedexceptthroughculpableabandon.
Otherwisehisownperson,rightsandproperty,andthoseofhisfellowbeings,wouldeverbeexposedtoall
mannerofdangerandinjury.[24]
Thetestfordeterminingwhetherapersonisnegligentindoinganactwherebyinjuryordamageresultsto
thepersonorpropertyofanotheristhis:Couldaprudentman,inthepositionofthepersontowhomnegligence
isattributed,foreseeharmtothepersoninjuredasareasonableconsequenceofthecourseactuallypursued?If
so, the law imposes a duty on the actor to refrain from that course or to take precautions to guard against its
mischievousresults,andthefailuretodosoconstitutesnegligence.Reasonableforesightofharm,followedby
theignoringoftheadmonitionbornofthisprevision,isalwaysnecessarybeforenegligencecanbeheldtoexist.
[25]

GLENN showed an inexcusable lack of precaution. Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code states that
reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which
material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or
failing to perform such act, taking into consideration (1) his employment or occupation (2) his degree of
intelligence(4)hisphysicalconditionand(3)othercircumstancesregardingpersons,timeandplace.
GLENN,beingthenayoungcollegegraduateandanexperienceddriver,shouldhaveknowntoapplythe
brakesorswervetoasafeplaceimmediatelyuponhearingthefirstbumpingthudstoavoidfurtherhittingthe
othertrainees.Byhisowntestimony,itwasestablishedthattheroadwasslipperyandslightlygoingdownward
and,worse,theplaceoftheincidentwasfoggyanddark.Heshouldhaveobservedduecareinaccordancewith
theconductofareasonablyprudentman,suchasbyslackeninghisspeed,applyinghisbrakes,orturningtothe
leftsideevenifitwouldmeanenteringtheoppositelane(therebeingnoevidencethatavehiclewascoming
fromtheoppositedirection).Itishighlyprobablethathewasdrivingathighspeedatthetime.Andevenifhe
was driving within the speed limits, this did not mean that he was exercising due care under the existing
circumstancesandconditionsatthetime.
Consideringthattheincidentwasnotaproductofamaliciousintentbutrathertheresultofasingleactof
reckless driving, GLENN should be held guilty of the complex crime of reckless imprudence resulting in
multiplehomicidewithseriousphysicalinjuriesandlessseriousphysicalinjuries.
Article48oftheRevisedPenalCodeprovidesthatwhenthesingleactconstitutestwoormoregraveorless
grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most
serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period. Since Article 48 speaks of
felonies,itisapplicabletocrimesthroughnegligenceinviewofthedefinitionoffeloniesinArticle3asactsor
omissionspunishablebylawcommittedeitherbymeansofdeceit(dolo)orfault(culpa).[26]InReodicav.Court
ofAppeals,[27]weruledthatifareckless,imprudent,ornegligentactresultsintwoormoregraveorlessgrave
felonies,acomplexcrimeiscommitted.Thus,inLapuzv.CourtofAppeals,[28]theaccusedwasconvicted,in
conformitywithArticle48oftheRevisedPenalCode,ofthecomplexcrimeofhomicidewithseriousphysical
injuries and damage to property through reckless imprudence, and was sentenced to a single penalty of
imprisonment,insteadofthetwopenaltiesimposedbythetrialcourt.Also,inSoriaov.CourtofAppeals,[29]the
accused was convicted of the complex crime of multiple homicide with damage to property through reckless
imprudenceforcausingamotorboattocapsize,therebydrowningtodeathitstwentyeightpassengers.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

5/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

TheslightphysicalinjuriescausedbyGLENNtothetenothervictimsthroughrecklessimprudence,would,
hadtheybeenintentional,haveconstitutedlightfelonies.Beinglightfelonies,whicharenotcoveredbyArticle
48,theyshouldbetreatedandpunishedasseparateoffenses.Separateinformationsshouldhave,therefore,been
filed.
It must be noted that only one information (for multiple murder, multiple frustrated murder and multiple
attemptedmurder)wasfiledwiththetrialcourt.However,nothingappearsintherecordthatGLENNobjected
tothemultiplicityoftheinformationinamotiontoquashbeforehisarraignment.Hence,heisdeemedtohave
waivedsuchdefect.[30]UnderSection3,Rule120oftheRulesofCourt,whentwoormoreoffensesarecharged
inasinglecomplaintorinformationandtheaccusedfailstoobjecttoitbeforetrial,thecourtmayconvictthe
accusedofasmanyoffensesasarechargedandproved,andimposeonhimthepenaltyforeachofthem.
Now,wecometothepenalty.UnderArticle365oftheRevisedPenalCode,anypersonwho,byreckless
imprudence,shallcommitanyactwhich,haditbeenintentional,wouldconstituteagravefelonyshallsufferthe
penaltyofarrestomayorinitsmaximumperiodtoprisioncorreccionalinitsmediumperiodandifitwould
haveconstitutedalightfelony,thepenaltyofarrestomenorinitsmaximumperiodshallbeimposed.Thelast
paragraphthereofprovidesthatthepenaltynexthigherindegreeshallbeimposedupontheoffenderwhofails
tolendonthespottotheinjuredpartiessuchhelpasmaybeinhishandtogive.Thisfailuretorenderassistance
tothevictim,therefore,constitutesaqualifyingcircumstancebecausethepresencethereofraisesthepenaltyby
onedegree.[31] Moreover, the fifth paragraph thereof provides that in the imposition of the penalty, the court
shall exercise its sound discretion without regard to the rules prescribed in Article 64. Elsewise stated, in
feloniesthroughimprudenceornegligence,modifyingcircumstancesneednotbeconsideredintheimposition
ofthepenalty.[32]
Inthecaseatbar,ithasbeenallegedintheinformationandprovedduringthetrialthatGLENNescaped
fromthesceneoftheincident,leavingbehindthevictims.ItbeingcrystalclearthatGLENNfailedtorenderaid
to the victims, the penalty provided for under Article 365 shall be raised by one degree. Hence, for reckless
imprudenceresultinginmultiplehomicidewithseriousphysicalinjuriesandlessseriousphysicalinjuries,the
penaltywouldbeprisioncorreccionalinitsmaximumperiodtoprisionmayorinitsmediumperiod.Applying
Article48,themaximumofsaidpenalty,whichisprisionmayorinitsmediumperiod,shouldbeimposed.For
theseparateoffensesofrecklessimprudenceresultinginslightphysicalinjuries,GLENNmaybesentencedto
suffer,foreachcount,thepenaltyofarrestomayorinitsminimumperiod.
Although it was established through the testimonies of prosecution witness Lemuel Pangca[33] and of
GLENNthatthelattersurrenderedtoGovernorEmanoofMisamisOriental,suchmitigatingcircumstanceneed
notbeconsideredpursuanttotheaforestatedfifthparagraphofArticle365.
UndertheIndeterminateSentenceLaw,GLENNmaybesentencedtosufferanindeterminatepenaltywhose
minimumiswithintherangeofthepenaltynextlowerindegreetothatprescribedfortheoffense,andwhose
maximumisthatwhichcouldproperlybeimposedtakingintoaccountthemodifyingcircumstances.Hence,for
thecomplexcrimeofrecklessimprudenceresultinginmultiplehomicidewithseriousphysicalinjuriesandless
serious physical injuries, qualified by his failure to render assistance to the victims, he may be sentenced to
sufferanindeterminatepenaltyrangingfromarrestomayorinitsmaximumperiodtoprisioncorreccionalinits
mediumperiod,asminimum,toprisionmayorinitsmediumperiod,asmaximum.Astothecrimesofreckless
imprudenceresultinginslightphysicalinjuries,sincethemaximumtermforeachcountisonlytwomonthsthe
IndeterminateSentenceLawwillnotapply.
Asfarastheawardofdamagesisconcerned,wefindanecessitytomodifythesame.Conformablywith
currentjurisprudence,[34]wereducethetrialcourtsawardofdeathindemnityfromP75,000toP50,000foreach
groupofheirsofthetraineeskilled.Likewise,forlackoffactualbasis,wedeletetheawardsofP30,000toeach
of those who suffered serious physical injuries and of P10,000 to each of those who suffered minor physical
injuries.
WHEREFORE,thedecisionoftheRegionalTrialCourt,Branch38,CagayandeOroCity,isherebySET
ASIDE, and another one is rendered holding herein accusedappellant GLENN DE LOS SANTOS guilty
beyondreasonabledoubtof(1)thecomplexcrimeofrecklessimprudenceresultinginmultiplehomicidewith
seriousphysicalinjuriesandlessseriousphysicalinjuries,andsentencinghimtosufferanindeterminatepenalty
offour(4)yearsofprisioncorreccional,asminimum,toten(10)yearsofprisionmayor,asmaximumand(2)
ten(10)countsofrecklessimprudenceresultinginslightphysicalinjuriesandsentencinghim,foreachcount,to
thepenaltyoftwo(2)monthsofarrestomayor.Furthermore,theawardsofdeathindemnityforeachgroupof
heirsofthetraineeskilledarereducedtoP50,000andtheawardsinfavoroftheothervictimsaredeleted.Costs
againstaccusedappellant.
SOORDERED.
Bellosillo, Melo, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Pardo, Buena, GonzagaReyes,
YnaresSantiago,DeLeon,Jr.,andSandovalGutierrez,JJ.,concur.
Puno,J.,abroadonofficialbusiness.
[1]TSN,19March1996,51520March1996,8389.
[2]TSN,19March1996,101620March1996,8790.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

6/7

1/29/2017

PeoplevsDeLosSantos:131588:March27,2001:C.J.Davide.Jr:EnBanc

[3]Id.,1623Id.,9196.
[4]Rollo,26.
[5]TSN,27March1996,616.
[6]TSN,15July1996,1216,2017July1996,124125.
[7]TSN,15July2001,1519.
[8]TSN,15July2001,1928.
[9]Id.,2930TSN,16July1996,8083,114.
[10]TSN,15July2001,3032,6466TSN,16July1996,8387,108109.
[11]TSN,15July1996,3236.
[12]TSN,17July1996,125128.
[13]Id.,132144.
[14]TSN,19August1996,1113.
[15]Decision,20Rollo40.
[16]BrieffortheAppellee,12Rollo,205.
[17]AppellantsBrief,53Rollo,150.
[18]Peoplev.Pacana,47Phil.48,57[1924].
[19]Peoplev.Santos,85SCRA630,639[1978].
[20] People v. Zamora de Cortez, 59 Phil. 568,569 [1934] People v. Modesto, 25 SCRA 36, 5051 [1968] People v. Boholst
Caballero,61SCRA180,191[1974]Peoplev.Tabije,113SCRA191,197[1982].
[21]106Phil.597,606[1959].
[22]AppellantsBrief,54Rollo,151.
[23]Peoplev.Modesto,supranote20,citingPeoplev.Hernandez,99Phil.515[1956]andPeoplev.Yuzon,101Phil.871[1957].
[24]U.S.v.Meleza,14Phil.468,470[1909],citedinPeoplev.Pugay,167SCRA439,448[1988].
[25]Picartv.Smith,37Phil.809,813[1918].
[26]1LUISB.REYES,THEREVISEDPENALCODE661662(1993),citingPeoplev.Castro,40O.G.,Supp.12,83.
[27]292SCRA87,102[1998].
[28]94Phil.710[1954],citedinPeoplev.Malabanan,2SCRA1185[1961],andPeoplev.Cuyos,160SCRA302[1988].
[29]175SCRA518[1989].
[30]Reodicav.CourtofAppeals,supranote27,at103.
[31]Ibabaov.People,132SCRA216,221[1984].
[32]SeealsoPeoplev.Agito,103Phil.526,529530[1958]Peoplev.Medroso,62SCRA245,249[1975].
[33]TSN,19March1996,25.
[34]Peoplev.Enguito,supranote28Peoplev.Bautista,G.R.No.131840,27April2000.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/mar2001/131588.htm

7/7