PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, V. SPO2 NAPOLEON VILLAGANES, ACCUSED-APPELLANT. RESOLUTION

People versus Villaganes

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against SPO2 Napoleon Villaganes, a criminal case in which the accused was convicted at trial and had appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court. While that appeal was still pending, the accused died. The case matters because it forces the Court to apply the rule on total extinction of criminal liability by death, and to say plainly what happens to a pending appeal, and to the civil liability arising from the crime, when the convict dies before final judgment.

Procedural History

The Regional Trial Court of Malabon City, Branch 169, rendered a Decision dated June 8, 2006, in Criminal Case Number 20279-MN. The accused-appellant brought that conviction up on appeal, and the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court.

On October 29, 2013, Julieta M. Villaganes, the wife of the accused-appellant, filed a Manifestation with Motion to Dismiss Due to Death of the Accused-Appellant, praying that the appeal be dismissed because the accused had died. Attached to the Manifestation was a certified true copy of the Certificate of Death showing that the accused-appellant died on June 26, 2013. The Court resolved the pending appeal on that basis.

Facts

The accused-appellant, SPO2 Napoleon Villaganes, was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Malabon City, Branch 169, in a Decision dated June 8, 2006. He appealed that conviction, and the appeal remained pending and undecided.

On June 26, 2013, while the appeal was still pending, the accused-appellant died. No final judgment had yet been rendered against him.

On October 29, 2013, his wife, Julieta M. Villaganes, filed a Manifestation with Motion to Dismiss Due to Death of the Accused-Appellant, asking that the appeal be dismissed on account of the death. She attached a certified true copy of the Certificate of Death establishing the fact and the date of death.

Issues

• Whether or not the death of the accused-appellant pending appeal of his conviction totally extinguishes his criminal liability.
• Whether or not the death of the accused-appellant pending appeal also extinguishes the civil liability arising from the crime, the civil liability ex delicto.
• Whether or not the Court still needs to rule on the merits of the appeal, that is, on whether the accused-appellant was guilty of the crime charged.

Applicable Provisions

Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code provides:

Article 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished: 1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.

This is the provision the Court applies: because the accused-appellant died before final judgment, both the personal penalties and the pecuniary penalties are extinguished.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the death of the accused-appellant pending the appeal of his conviction extinguished his criminal liability. The Court applied Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code, which totally extinguishes criminal liability by the death of the convict as to personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties when death occurs before final judgment. Here, the appeal was still pending and no final judgment had been rendered against him at the time of his death.

On the second issue, the Court held that the civil liability ex delicto, the civil liability arising from the crime, was likewise extinguished. The Court relied on its ruling in People of the Philippines versus Nelson Bayot y Satina, and quoted it with approval:

From the foregoing, it is clear that the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability, as well as the civil liability ex delicto. The rationale, therefore, is that the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused, the civil action instituted therein for recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal case.

On the third issue, the Court held that it was already unnecessary to rule on the appeal. As the Court put it, whether or not the appellant was guilty of the crime charged had become irrelevant, because even assuming that he did incur criminal liability and civil liability ex delicto, these were totally extinguished by his death under Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code and the ruling in People versus Bayotas.

Doctrine

First, under Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code, the death of the convict totally extinguishes criminal liability as to the personal penalties, and as to the pecuniary penalties the liability is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.

Second, the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes not only his criminal liability but also the civil liability ex delicto. The criminal action is extinguished because there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused, and the civil action for civil liability ex delicto is extinguished as a matter of law, ipso facto, because it is grounded on the criminal case.

Third, when the accused dies while his appeal is pending and before final judgment, the Court need not rule on the merits of the appeal. Whether or not he was guilty becomes irrelevant, since any liability, criminal or civil ex delicto, is totally extinguished by death.

Disposition

In view of the death of the accused-appellant, the Court set aside the Decision dated June 8, 2006 of the Regional Trial Court of Malabon City, Branch 169, and dismissed Criminal Case Number 20279-MN.

Remember This

Memorize the line: the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability ex delicto, and the appeal need no longer be decided on the merits. Examiners use this case to test Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code and the reach of the Bayotas doctrine, especially the distinction between civil liability ex delicto, which dies with the accused, and civil liability arising from other sources, which does not.