1

[G.R. No. 144656. May 9, 2002] June 11, 1999, she was informed that the dead body of her daughter was found tied to
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GERRICO VALLEJO Y the root of an aroma tree by the river after the compuerta by a certain Freddie Quinto.
SAMARTINO @ PUKE, accused-appellant. The body was already in the barangay hall when Ma. Nida saw her daughter. Daisy was
DECISION wearing her pink short pants with her sleeveless shirt tied around her neck. Barangay
PER CURIAM: Councilmen Raul Ricasa and Calring Purihin reported the incident to the Rosario police.
This is an appeal from the decisioni of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 88, Cavite The other barangay officers fetched accused-appellant from his house and took him to
City, sentencing Gerrico Vallejo y Samartino to death and ordering him to indemnify the the barangay hall. At the barangay hall, Ma. Nida pointed to accused-appellant Gerrico
heirs of the victim in the amount of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as Vallejo as the probable suspect since he was with the victim when she was last seen
moral damages for the rape-slaying of a 9-year old child, Daisy Diolola, in Rosario, alive.iii
Cavite on July 10, 1999. Another witness, Jessiemin Mataverde, testified that at around 3:00 oclock in the
The Information charging accused-appellant Gerrico Vallejo with the crime of Rape afternoon of that day, she saw Daisy playing with other children outside her house. She
with Homicide alleged: asked Daisy and her playmates to stop playing as their noise was keeping Jessiemins
That on or about the 10th day of July 1999, in Barangay Ligtong I, one-year old baby awake. Daisy relented and watched television instead from the door of
Municipality of Rosario, Province of Cavite, Philippines and within the Jessiemins house. About five minutes later, accused-appellant came to the house and
jurisdiction of this Honorable Trial Court, the above-named accused, with lewd told Daisy something, as a result of which she went with him and the two proceeded
design, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there, willfully, towards the compuerta.
unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with DAISY DIOLOLA Y Jessiemin testified that at around 5:00 oclock that afternoon, while she and her
DITALO, a nine-year old child against the latters will and while raping the said daughter were in front of a store across the street from her house, accused-appellant
victim, said accused strangled her to death. arrived to buy a stick of Marlboro cigarette. Accused-appellant had only his basketball
CONTRARY TO LAW.ii shorts on and was just holding his shirt. They noticed both his shorts and his shirt were
Accused-appellant was arraigned on July 26, 1999 and, with the assistance of wet. After lighting his cigarette, accused-appellant left.iv
counsel, pleaded not guilty to the crime charged, whereupon trial ensued. Charito Yepes, another neighbor of Ma. Nida, also testified. She said that at about
Ten (10) witnesses testified for the prosecution, namely, Ma. Nida Diolola, the 4:30 oclock in the afternoon of July 10, 1999, while she and her husband and children
victims mother; Dr. Antonio S. Vertido, medico-legal officer of the NBI; Atty. Lupo Leyva; were walking towards the compuerta near the seashore of Ligtong, Rosario, Cavite, they
Mayor Renato Abutan of Rosario, Cavite; Atty. Sikat Agbunag of the Public Attorneys met a fisherman named Herminio who said that it was a good day for catching milkfish
Office; Pet Byron Buan, NBI Forensic Biologist; Aida Viloria-Magsipoc, NBI Forensic (bangus). For this reason, according to this witness, they decided to get some fishing
Chemist; SPO1 Arnel Cuevas of the Rosario, Cavite police station; and Jessiemin implements. She said they met accused-appellant Gerrico Vallejo near the seashore and
Mataverde and Charito Paras-Yepes, both neighbors of the victim. noticed that he was uneasy and looked troubled. Charito said that accused-appellant did
The victims mother, Ma. Nida Diolola, testified that at around 1:00 oclock in the not even greet them, which was unusual. She also testified that accused-appellants
afternoon of July 10, 1999, she sent her 9-year old daughter Daisy Diolola to their shorts and shirt (sando) were wet, but his face and hair were not.v
neighbors house in Pilapil, Ligtong I, Rosario, Cavite, so that Aimee Vallejo, the sister of SPO1 Arnel Cuevas testified that upon receipt of the report, Rosario Police Chief
accused-appellant, could help Daisy with her lessons. Aimees house, where accused- Ricardo B. de la Cruz, Jr. responded to the call together with his men, PO2 Garcia,
appellant was also staying, is about four to five meters away from Daisys house. Ma. SPO1 Araracap and PO2 Lariza. When they arrived, Daisys body was already in the
Nida saw her daughter go to the house of her tutor. She was wearing pink short pants barangay hall. SPO1 Cuevas took photographs of the body. At that time, Daisy was
and a white sleeveless shirt. An hour later, Daisy came back with accused-appellant. wearing pink short pants and a dirty white panty with a dirty white sleeveless shirt
They were looking for a book which accused-appellant could copy to make a drawing or wrapped around her neck. The body was afterwards taken to the Samson Funeral Parlor
a poster that Daisy would submit to her teacher. After finding the book, Daisy and in Rosario, Cavite. The inquiries conducted by the police showed that one Freddie Quinto
accused-appellant went back to the latters house. When Ma. Nida woke up at about 5:30 was fishing near the compuerta when he accidentally hit the body of Daisy, which was in
oclock after an afternoon nap, she noticed that Daisy was not yet home. She started the mud and tied to the root of an aroma tree.
looking for her daughter and proceeded to the house of Aimee, Daisys tutor. Aimees Accused-appellant was invited by the policemen for questioning. Two others, a
mother told Ma. Nida that Daisy was not there and that Aimee was not able to help Daisy certain Raymond and Esting, were also taken into custody because they were seen with
with her lessons because Aimee was not feeling well as she had her menstrual period. accused-appellant in front of the store in the late afternoon of July 10 1999. Later,
Ma. Nida looked for Daisy in her brothers and sisters houses, but she was not there, however, the two were released. Based on the statements of Jessiemin Mataverde and
either. At about 7:00 oclock that evening, Ma. Nida went back to her neighbors house, Charito Paras-Yepes, the policemen went to the house of accused-appellant at about
and there saw accused-appellant, who told her that Daisy had gone to her classmates 4:00 oclock in the afternoon of July 11, 1999 and recovered the white basketball shirt,
house to borrow a book. But, when Ma. Nida went there, she was told that Daisy had not with the name Samartino and No. 13 printed at the back, and the violet basketball shorts,
been there. Ma. Nida went to the dike and was told that they saw Daisy playing at about with the number 9 printed on it, worn by accused-appellant the day before. The shirt and
3:30 oclock in the afternoon. Jessiemin Mataverde also told Ma. Nida that Daisy was shorts, which were bloodstained, were turned over to the NBI for laboratory
playing in front of her house that afternoon and even watched television in her house, but examination.vi
that Daisy later left with accused-appellant. Dr. Antonio S. Vertido, NBI Medico-Legal Officer, testified that at about 9:00 oclock
Ma. Nida and her brother and sister searched for Daisy the whole evening of June in the evening of July 11, 1999, he conducted a physical examination of accused-
10, 1999, a Saturday, until the early morning of the following day, June 11, 1999, a appellant. His findingsvii showed the following:
Sunday, but their search proved fruitless. Then, at about 10:00 oclock in the morning of PHYSICAL FINDINGS:
 2

Abrasions: thigh, right, antero-lateral aspect, lower 3rd 5.0 x 0.1 cm., of Atty. Leyva. After the statement was taken, Atty. Leyva and accused-appellant read it
knee, left, 7.0 x 6.0 cm. legs, right anterior aspect, 28.0 x 8.0 cms., left and afterwards signed it. Atty. Leyva testified that he did not see or notice any indication
anterior aspect, 24.0 x 10.0 cms., feet, plantar aspects; right, 9.0 x 3.0 cms. that accused-appellant had been maltreated by the police. In his sworn statement (Exh.
and left, 13.0 x 5.0 cms. M), accused-appellant confessed to killing the victim by strangling her to death, but
Hematoma, left ring finger, posterior aspect, 1.0 x 0.5 cm. denied having molested her.x
Lacerations, left ring finger, posterior aspect, 0.3 cm. Pet Byron Buan, Forensic Biologist of the NBI, testified that on July 12, 1999, he
(Living Case No. BMP-9902, p. 101, records) took blood samples from accused-appellant in his office for laboratory examination to
At about 10:00 oclock in the evening, Dr. Vertido went to the Samson Funeral determine his blood type. Likewise, the basketball shorts and shirt worn by accused-
Parlor in Rosario, Cavite for an autopsy on the cadaver of the victim Daisy Diolola. The appellant on the day the victim was missing and the victims clothing were turned over to
autopsy revealed the following postmortem findings:viii the Forensic Chemistry Division of the NBI by PO1 Amoranto of the Rosario, Cavite
Body in early stage of postmortem decomposition characterized by foul police for the purpose of determining the presence of human blood and its groups.xi
odor, eyes and tongue protruding, bloating of the face and blister formation. The results of the examinations conducted by Pet Byron T. Buan showed accused-
Washerwomans hands and feet. appellant to belong to Group O. The following specimens: (1) one (1) white no. 13
Contusion, (pinkish) face, right, 14.0 x 10.0 cms. and left, 13.0 x 6.0 athletic basketball shirt, with patches Grizzlies in front and SAMARTINO at the back; (2)
cms. Contused abrasions, forehead, 13.0 x 5.0 cms. upper lip, 5.0 x 22.0 one (1) violet no. 9 athletic basketball short pants; (3) one (1) white small Hello Kitty T-
cms., lower lip, 3.0 x 2.0 cms., neck (nailmarks) anterior aspect, 8.0 x 5.0 shirt with reddish brown stains; (4) one (1) cut pink short pants with reddish brown stains;
cms., arms, right antero-medial aspect, middle 3rd 3.0 x 15.0 cms. posterior (5) one (1) cut dirty white small panty with reddish brown stains, were all positive for the
aspect, upper 3rd, 1.5 x 1.0 cms., left posterior aspect, 20.0 x 9.0 cms., presence of human blood showing the reactions of Group A.xii
forearm, left, posterior aspect, 21.0 x 8.0 cms. left thumb, anterior aspect, 1.5 Pet Byron Buan also testified that before he took the blood samples, he had a
x 1.0 cms., left middle, ring and little fingers, dorsal aspect, .50 x 4.0 cms. conversation with accused-appellant during which the latter admitted that he had raped
knees, right, 3.0 x 2.0 cms. and left, 8.0- x 5.0 cms., legs, right anterior and later killed the victim by strangulation and stated that he was willing to accept the
aspect, upper and middle 3rd 3.0 x 2.5 cms. foot right, dorsal aspect. punishment that would be meted out on him because of the grievous offense he had
Hematoma, periorbital right, 5.0 x 3.0 cms. and left, 4.5 x 3.0 cms. committed. Mr. Buan observed that accused-appellant was remorseful and was crying
Fracture, tracheal rings. when he made the confession in the presence of SPO1 Amoranto at the NBI
Hemorrhages, interstitial, neck, underneath, nailmarks. Petechial laboratory.xiii
hemorrhages, subendocardial, subpleural. When accused-appellant was brought before Inquest Prosecutor Elpidia J. Itoc at
Brain and other visceral organs are congested. around noon of July 13, 1999 in Cavite City, accused-appellant had with him a
Stomach, contains rice and other food particles. handwritten confession which he had executed inside his cell at the Municipal Jail of
CAUSE OF DEATH: -Asphyxia by Manual Strangulation. Rosario. In his confession, accused-appellant admitted not only that he killed the victim
GENITAL EXAMINATION: - Pubic hair, no growth. Labia majora and but that he had before that raped her. Accused-appellant said he laid down the victim on
minora, gaping and congested. Hymen, moderately tall, thick with fresh a grassy area near the dike. He claimed that she did not resist when he removed her
lacerations, complete at 3:00, 6:00 and 9:00 oclock positions, edges with undergarments but that when he tried to insert his penis into the victims vagina, she
blood clots. [Autopsy Report No. BTNO-99-152] struggled and resisted. Accused-appellant said he panicked and killed the child. He then
Renato Abutan, Municipal Mayor of Rosario, Cavite, testified that he was informed dumped her body in the shallow river near the compuerta and went home.xiv
of the rape and murder at past 10:00 oclock in the evening of June 11, 1999. The mayor Atty. Sikat Agbunag, a lawyer from the Public Attorneys Office, testified that at noon
said he immediately proceeded to the municipal jail, where accused-appellant was of July 13, 1999, while she was in their office in Cavite City, Prosecutor Itoc came
detained, and talked to the latter. Accused-appellant at first denied having anything to do together with accused-appellant and some policemen. Prosecutor Itoc asked Atty.
with the killing and rape of the child. The mayor said he told accused-appellant that he Agbunag to assist accused-appellant about his confession. Atty. Agbunag read the
could not help him if he did not tell the truth. At that point, accused-appellant started document, informed accused-appellant of his constitutional rights, and warned him that
crying and told the mayor that he killed the victim by strangling her. Accused-appellant the document could be used against him and that he could be convicted of the case
claimed that he was under the influence of drugs. The mayor asked accused-appellant if against him, but, according to her, accused-appellant said that he had freely and
he wanted to have the services of Atty. Lupo Leyva, a resident of Rosario, as his lawyer. voluntarily executed the document because he was bothered by his conscience.
When accused-appellant said he did, Mayor Abutan fetched Atty. Leyva from his house Accused-appellant, assisted by Atty. Agbunag, then affixed his signature to the document
and took him to the police station about 11:00 oclock that evening.ix and swore to it before Prosecutor Itoc.xv
Atty. Lupo Leyva corroborated Mayor Abutans testimony. He said that upon arriving At the instance of City Prosecutor Agapito S. Lu of Cavite City, NBI Forensic
at the police station, he asked accused-appellant if he wanted his services as counsel in Biologist Pet Byron Buan took buccal swabs and hair samples from accused-appellant,
the investigation. After accused-appellant assented, Atty. Leyva testified that he sort of as well as buccal swabs and hair samples from the parents of the victim, namely, Ma.
discouraged the former from making statements as anything he said could be used Nida Diolola and Arnulfo Diolola. The samples were submitted to the DNA Laboratory of
against him. But, as accused-appellant was willing to be investigated, Atty. Leyva said he the NBI for examination.
advised him to tell the truth. PO2 Garcia, the investigator, informed accused-appellant of Aida Viloria-Magsipoc, Forensic Chemist of the NBI, conducted DNA tests on the
his constitutional rights to remain silent and to be assisted by counsel and warned him specimens collected by Dr. Vertido. She testified that the vaginal swabs of the victim
that any answer he gave could and might be used against him in a court of law. PO2 taken by Dr. Vertido during the autopsy contained the DNA profiles of accused-appellant
Garcia asked questions from accused-appellant, who gave his answers in the presence and the victim.xvi
 3

The defense then presented as witnesses accused-appellant Gerrico Vallejo and INSUFFICIENCY AND WEAKNESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANTIAL
his sister Aimee Vallejo. Their testimonies show that at about 1:00 oclock in the EVIDENCE OF THE PROSECUTION.
afternoon of July 10, 1999, accused-appellant, Aimee, and their sister Abigail were in II. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING EVIDENTIARY
their house in Barangay Talisay, Ligtong I, Rosario, Cavite when Daisy Diolola came to WEIGHT TO THE ALLEGED ORAL CONFESSIONS OF THE ACCUSED-
ask accused-appellant to draw her school project. After making the request, Daisy left.xvii APPELLANT DESPITE ITS BEING HEARSAY IN NATURE.
Accused-appellant did not immediately make the drawing because he was watching III. THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN GIVING
television. Accused-appellant said that he finished the drawing at about 3:00 oclock in PROBATIVE VALUE TO THE WRITTEN EXTRA-JUDICIAL
the afternoon and gave it to the victims aunt, Glory. He then returned home to watch CONFESSION OF THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT DESPITE THE FACT
television again. He claimed he did not go out of the house until 7:00 oclock in the THAT THE SAME WAS OBTAINED THROUGH FORCE AND
evening when he saw Ma. Nida, who was looking for her daughter. Accused-appellant INTIMIDATION AND THAT THE LAWYER WHO ASSISTED HIM
said he told her that he had not seen Daisy. After that, accused-appellant said he went to DURING HIS CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION DID NOT AND COULD NOT
the pilapil and talked with some friends, and, at about 8:00 oclock that evening, he went POSSIBLY GIVE HIM EFFECTIVE LEGAL ASSISTANCE.
home. We find accused-appellants contentions to be without merit.
At 9:00 oclock in the morning of July 11, 1999, barangay officials fetched accused- First. An accused can be convicted even if no eyewitness is available, provided
appellant from his house and took him to the barangay hall, where he was asked about sufficient circumstantial evidence is presented by the prosecution to prove beyond
the disappearance of Daisy. He claimed that he did not know anything about it. Accused- reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime.xxi In rape with homicide, the
appellant was allowed to go home, but, at 11:00 oclock that morning, policemen came evidence against an accused is more often than not circumstantial. This is because the
and invited him to the police headquarters for questioning. His mother went with him to nature of the crime, where only the victim and the rapist would have been present at the
the police station. There, accused-appellant was asked whether he had something to do time of its commission, makes the prosecution of the offense particularly difficult since
with the rape and killing of Daisy. He denied knowledge of the crime. the victim could no longer testify against the perpetrator. Resort to circumstantial
At 4:00 oclock that afternoon, accused-appellant accompanied the police to his evidence is inevitable and to demand direct evidence proving the modality of the offense
house to get the basketball shorts and shirt he was wearing the day before, which were and the identity of the perpetrator is unreasonable.xxii
placed together with other dirty clothes at the back of their house. According to accused- Under Rule 133, section 4 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, circumstantial
appellant, the police forced him to admit that he had raped and killed Daisy and that he evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction if:
admitted having committed the crime to stop them from beating him up. Accused- (a) there is more than one circumstance;
appellant claimed the police even burned his penis with a lighted cigarette and pricked it (b) the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
with a needle. (c) the combination of all circumstances is such as to produce conviction
Accused-appellant confirmed that Mayor Renato Abutan and Atty. Lupo Leyva went beyond reasonable doubt.xxiii
to see him in the investigation room of the police station and told him that they would In the case at bar, the following circumstantial evidence establish beyond
help him if he told the truth. Atty. Leyva asked him whether he wanted him to be his reasonable doubt the guilt of accused-appellant:
counsel, and accused-appellant said he answered in the affirmative. He said Atty. Leyva 1. The victim went to Aimee Vallejos house, where accused-appellant was
informed him of his constitutional rights. Accused-appellant claimed that, although he residing, at 1:00 oclock in the afternoon of July 10, 1999, for tutoring.
admitted to Mayor Abutan and Atty. Leyva the commission of the crime, this was 2. At around 2:00 oclock in the afternoon, accused-appellant and Daisy went
because the police had maltreated him. Accused-appellant said he did not tell the mayor together to the latters house to get a book from which the former could
or Atty. Leyva that he had been tortured because the policemen were around and he was copy Daisys school project. After getting the book, they proceeded to
afraid of them. It appears that the family of accused-appellant transferred their residence accused-appellants residence.
to Laguna on July 12, 1999 because of fear of reprisal by residents of their barangay. xviii 3. From accused-appellants house, Daisy then went to the house of
According to accused-appellant, Mayor Abutan and Atty. Leyva were not present when Jessiemin Mataverde where she watched television. Accused-appellant
he gave his confession to the police and signed the same. Accused-appellant claims that thereafter arrived and whispered something to Daisy, and the latter went
although Exhibit N was in his own handwriting, he merely copied the contents thereof with him towards the compuerta.
from a pattern given to him by the police.xix 4. At about 4:30 oclock in the afternoon, the spouses Iluminado and Charito
On July 31, 2000, the trial court rendered a decision finding accused-appellant Yepes saw accused-appellant coming out of the compuerta, with his
guilty of the offense charged. The dispositive portion of its decision reads: clothes, basketball shorts, and t-shirt wet, although his face and hair were
WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing considerations, the Court not. According to these witnesses, he looked pale, uneasy, and troubled
finds the accused Gerrico Vallejo y Samartino GUILTY beyond reasonable (balisa). He kept looking around and did not even greet them as was his
doubt of the crime of Rape with Homicide, as charged in the Information, custom to do so.
accordingly hereby sentences him to the supreme penalty of DEATH. The 5. The fishing boat which accused-appellant used as a bomber (a boat for
accused is directed to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the amount of catching fish with dynamite) was docked by the seashore.
P100,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages. 6. A little before 5:00 oclock in the afternoon, Jessiemin Mataverde also saw
SO ORDERED.xx accused-appellant buying a Marlboro cigarette from a store. Jessiemen
Hence this appeal. Accused-appellant contends that: also noticed that accused-appellants clothes were wet but not his face nor
I. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED- his hair.
APPELLANT OF RAPE WITH HOMICIDE DESPITE THE 7. By 5:30 oclock in the afternoon, as Ma. Nida Diolola looked for her
 4

daughter, she was told by accused-appellant that Daisy had gone to her from the victims body for the suspects DNA. This is the evidence sample. The evidence
classmate Rosarios house. The information proved to be false. sample is then matched with the reference sample taken from the suspect and the
8. Daisys body was found tied to an aroma tree at the part of the river near victim.xxx
the compuerta. The purpose of DNA testing is to ascertain whether an association exists between
9. During the initial investigation, accused-appellant had scratches on his feet the evidence sample and the reference sample.xxxi The samples collected are subjected
similar to those caused by the thorns of an aroma tree. to various chemical processes to establish their profile.xxxii The test may yield three
10. The clothes which accused-appellant wore the day before were possible results:
bloodstained. The bloodstains on accused-appellants clothes and on 1) The samples are different and therefore must have originated from different
Daisys clothes were found positive of human blood type A. sources (exclusion). This conclusion is absolute and requires no further analysis or
11. Accused-appellant has blood type O. discussion;
12. The vaginal swabs from Daisys body contained her DNA profile as well as 2) It is not possible to be sure, based on the results of the test, whether the samples
that of accused-appellant. have similar DNA types (inconclusive). This might occur for a variety of reasons including
Accused-appellant contends that the bloodstains found on his garments were not degradation, contamination, or failure of some aspect of the protocol. Various parts of the
proven to have been that of the victim as the victims blood type was not determined. analysis might then be repeated with the same or a different sample, to obtain a more
The contention has no merit. The examination conducted by Forensic Biologist Pet conclusive result; or
Byron Buan of both accused-appellants and the victims clothing yielded bloodstains of 3) The samples are similar, and could have originated from the same source
the same blood type A.xxiv Even if there was no direct determination as to what blood (inclusion).xxxiii In such a case, the samples are found to be similar, the analyst proceeds
type the victim had, it can reasonably be inferred that the victim was blood type A since to determine the statistical significance of the Similarity.xxxiv
she sustained contused abrasions all over her body which would necessarily produce the In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, therefore, courts should
bloodstains on her clothing.xxv That it was the victims blood which predominantly consider, among others things, the following data: how the samples were collected, how
registered in the examination was explained by Mr. Buan, thus:xxvi they were handled, the possibility of contamination of the samples, the procedure
ATTY. ESPIRITU followed in analyzing the samples, whether the proper standards and procedures were
Q: But you will agree with me that more probably than not, if a crime is being followed in conducting the tests, and the qualification of the analyst who conducted the
committed, and it results in a bloody death, it is very possible that the blood of tests.
the victim and the blood of the assailant might mix in that particular item like the In the case at bar, the bloodstains taken from the clothing of the victim and of
t-shirt, shorts or pants? accused-appellant, the smears taken from the victim as well as the strands of hair and
A: It is possible when there is a huge amount of blood coming from the victim and nails taken from her tested negative for the presence of human DNA,xxxv because, as Ms.
the suspect, Sir. It is possible. It will mix. Whichever is the dominant blood in it, Viloria-Magsipoc explained:
it will be the one which will register. For example, if there is more blood coming PROSECUTOR LU:
from the victim, that blood will be the one to register, on occasions when the two Q: I noticed that specimens 1 to 5 consisting of bloodstains taken from the clothing
blood mix. of the victim and of the accused gave negative results for the presence of
Q: But in these specimens number 1 to 5, it is very clear now that only type A and human DNA. Why is it so? What is the reason for this when there are still
no type O blood was found? bloodstains on the clothing?
A: Yes, sir. A: After this Honorable Court issued an Order for DNA analysis, serological
Accused-appellant also questions the validity of the method by which his methods were already conducted on the said specimens. And upon inquiry from
bloodstained clothes were recovered. According to accused-appellant, the policemen Mr. Buan and as far as he also knew of this case, and we also interviewed the
questioned him as to the clothes he wore the day before. Thereafter, they took him to his mother who came over to the laboratory one time on how was the state of the
house and accused-appellant accompanied them to the back of the house where dirty specimens when they were found out. We found that these specimens were
clothes were kept.xxvii There is no showing, however, that accused-appellant was coerced soaked in smirchy water before they were submitted to the laboratory. The state
or forced into producing the garments. Indeed, that the accused-appellant voluntarily of the specimens prior to the DNA analysis could have hampered the
brought out the clothes sought by the police becomes more convincing when considered preservation of any DNA that could have been there before. So when
together with his confessions. A consented warrantless search is an exception to the serological methods were done on these specimens, Mr. Byron could have
proscription in Section 2 of Article III of the Constitution. As we have held, the consent of taken such portion or stains that were only amenable for serological method and
the owner of the house to the search effectively removes any badge of illegality.xxviii were not enough for DNA analysis already. So negative results were found on
The DNA analysis conducted by NBI Forensic Chemist Aida Viloria-Magsipoc is the clothings that were submitted which were specimens no. 1 to 5 in my report,
also questioned by accused-appellant. He argues that the prosecution failed to show that Sir.
all the samples submitted for DNA testing were not contaminated, considering that these Q: I also noticed that specimen no. 6-B consisting of the smears taken from the
specimens were already soaked in smirchy waters before they were submitted to the victim also proved negative for human DNA, why is it so?
laboratory. A: Because when we received the vaginal smears submitted by Dr. Vertido, the
DNA is an organic substance found in a persons cells which contains his or her smear on the slide was very, very dry and could have chipped off. I already
genetic code. Except for identical twins, each persons DNA profile is distinct and informed Dr. Vertido about it and he confirmed the state of the specimen. And I
unique.xxix told him that maybe it would be the swab that could help us in this case, Sir.
When a crime is committed, material is collected from the scene of the crime or And so upon examination, the smears geared negative results and the swabs
 5

gave positive results, Sir. investigation to persons in authority without the presence of counsel. With respect to the
Q: How about specimen no. 7, the hair and nails taken from the victim, why did oral confessions, Atty. Leyva testified:xxxix
they show negative results for DNA? PROSECUTOR LU:
A: The hair samples were cut hair. This means that the hair did not contain any Q: Upon meeting this Gerrico Vallejo at the police station were you able to confer
root. So any hair that is above the skin or the epidermis of ones skin would give with him?
negative results as the hair shaft is negative for DNA. And then the nails did not A: Yes, Sir.
contain any subcutaneous cells that would be amenable for DNA analysis also, Q: Did you ask him whether he really wants you to represent or assist him as a
Sir. lawyer during that investigation?
Q: So its the inadequacy of the specimens that were the reason for this negative A: I did, as a matter of fact, I asked him whether he would like me to represent him
result, not the inadequacy of the examination or the instruments used? in that investigation, Sir.
A: Yes, Sir. Q: And what was his answer?
Thus, it is the inadequacy of the specimens submitted for examination, and not the A: He said yes.
possibility that the samples had been contaminated, which accounted for the negative Q: After agreeing to retain you as his counsel, what else did you talk about?
results of their examination. But the vaginal swabs taken from the victim yielded positive A: I told him that in the investigation, whatever he will state may be used against
for the presence of human DNA. Upon analysis by the experts, they showed the DNA him, so its a sort of discouraging him from making any statement to the police,
profile of accused-appellant:xxxvi Sir.
PROSECUTOR LU: Upon cross-examination, Atty. Leyva testified as follows:xl
Q: So based on your findings, can we say conclusively that the DNA profile of the Q: You stated that you personally read this recital of the constitutional rights of the
accused in this case was found in the vaginal swabs taken from the victim? accused?
A: Yes, Sir. A: Yes, Sir.
Q: That is very definite and conclusive? Q: But it will appear in this recital of constitutional rights that you did not inform the
A: Yes, Sir." accused that the statement that he will be giving might be used against him in a
In conclusion, we hold that the totality of the evidence points to no other conclusion court of justice?
than that accused-appellant is guilty of the crime charged. Evidence is weighed not A: I did that, Sir.
counted. When facts or circumstances which are proved are not only consistent with the Q: But it does not appear in this statement?
guilt of the accused but also inconsistent with his innocence, such evidence, in its weight PROSECUTOR LU
and probative force, may surpass direct evidence in its effect upon the court. xxxvii This is The best evidence will be the statement, your Honor.
how it is in this case. ATTY ESPIRITU
Second. Accused-appellant challenges the validity of the oral and written The only thing that is stated here is that Maaaring gamitin pabor o laban sa iyo.
confessions presented as evidence against him. He alleges that the oral confessions COURT
were inadmissible in evidence for being hearsay, while the extrajudicial confessions were Let the witness answer.
obtained through force and intimidation. A: I told him that, as a matter of fact, and I also told him to tell the truth and nothing
The claim is untenable. Section 12 of Art. III of the Constitution provides in pertinent but the truth.
parts: The testimony of Atty. Leyva is not only corroborated by the testimony of Mayor
(1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall Renato Abutan,xli it is also confirmed by accused-appellant who testified as follows:xlii
have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have ATTY. ESPIRITU:
competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice. If the Q: Did Atty. Leyva explain to you the meaning and significance of that document
person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with which you are supposed to have executed and signed?
one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence A: Yes, Sir.
of counsel. Q: What did Atty. Leyva tell you?
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or any other means which A: That they are allowing me to exercise my constitutional right to reveal or narrate
vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, all what I know about this case, Sir.
solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited. Q: Did Atty. Leyva tell you that if you do not want, nobody can force you to give
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 that statement?
shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. A: Yes, Sir.
There are two kinds of involuntary or coerced confessions treated in this Q: And did he tell you that what you would be giving is an extra-judicial
constitutional provision: (1) coerced confessions, the product of third degree methods confession?
such as torture, force, violence, threat, and intimidation, which are dealt with in A: Yes, Sir.
paragraph 2 of Section 12, and (2) uncounselled statements, given without the benefit of Clearly, accused-appellant cannot now claim that he was not apprised of the
Miranda warnings, which are the subject of paragraph 1 of the same section.xxxviii consequences of the statements he was to make as well as the written confessions he
Accused-appellant argues that the oral confessions given to Mayor Abutan of was to execute. Neither can he question the qualifications of Atty. Lupo Leyva who acted
Rosario, Cavite and to NBI Forensic Biologist should be deemed inadmissible for being as his counsel during the investigation. To be an effective counsel, a lawyer need not
violative of his constitutional rights as these were made by one already under custodial challenge all the questions being propounded to his client. The presence of a lawyer is
 6

not intended to stop an accused from saying anything which might incriminate him but, chosen to remain silent or to do deny altogether any participation in the
rather, it was adopted in our Constitution to preclude the slightest coercion as would lead robbery and killings but he did not; thus accused-appellant sealed his own
the accused to admit something false. Indeed, counsel should not prevent an accused fate. As held in People v. Montiero, a confession constitutes evidence of high
from freely and voluntarily telling the truth.xliii order since it is supported by the strong presumption that no person of normal
Indeed, accused-appellant admitted that he was first asked whether he wanted the mind would deliberately and knowingly confess to a crime unless prompted by
services of Atty. Leyva before the latter acted as his defense counsel.xliv And counsel truth and his conscience.
who is provided by the investigators is deemed engaged by the accused where the latter And in People vs. Andan, it was explained:
never raised any objection against the formers appointment during the course of the Thus, it has been held that the constitutional procedures on custodial
investigation but, on the contrary, thereafter subscribed to the veracity of his statement investigation do not apply to a spontaneous statement, not elicited through
before the swearing officer.xlv Contrary to the assertions of accused-appellant, Atty. questioning by the authorities, but given in an ordinary manner whereby
Leyva was not the municipal attorney of Rosario, Cavite but only a legal adviser of Mayor appellant orally admitted having committed the crime. What the Constitution
Renato Abutan.xlvi bars is the compulsory disclosure of incriminating facts or confessions. The
Accused-appellant contends that the rulings in People vs. Andanxlvii and People vs. rights under Section 12 are guaranteed to preclude the slightest use of
Mantungxlviii do not apply to this case. We disagree. The facts of these cases and that of coercion by the state as would lead the accused to admit something false, not
the case at bar are similar. In all these cases, the accused made extrajudicial prevent him from freely and voluntarily telling the truth.li
confessions to the municipal mayor freely and voluntarily. In all of them, the extrajudicial For the same reason, the oral confession made by accused-appellant to NBI
confessions were held admissible in evidence, being the spontaneous, free, and Forensic Biologist Pet Byron Buan is admissible. Accused-appellant would have this
voluntary admissions of the guilt of the accused. We note further that the testimony of Court exclude this confession on the ground that it was uncounselled and that Mr. Buan,
Mayor Abutan was never objected to by the defense. who initiated the conversation with accused-appellant, was part of the NBI. The issue
Indeed, the mayors questions to accused-appellant were not in the nature of an concerning the sufficiency of the assistance given by Atty. Leyva has already been
interrogation, but rather an act of benevolence by a leader seeking to help one of his discussed. On the other hand, the questions put by Mr. Buan to accused-appellant were
constituents. Thus, Mayor Abutan testified:xlix asked out of mere personal curiosity and clearly not as part of his tasks. As Buan
PROSECUTOR LU: testified:lii
Q: And during the conversation you had with Accused Gerrico Vallejo, what exactly PROSECUTOR LU:
did he tell you? Q: What was the subject of your conversation with him?
A: At first he said that he did not do that. That was the first thing he told me. Then I A: It is customary when we examine the accused. During the examination, we talk
told him that I will not be able to help him if he will not tell me the truth. to them for me to add knowledge on the case, Sir.
Q: And what was the reply of the accused? Q: What did you talk about during your conversation?
A: He had been silent for a minute. Then we talked about the incident, Sir. A: I asked him if he was the one who did the killing on this victim, Daisy Diolola,
Q: And what exactly did he tell you about the incident? Sir.
A: I asked him, Were you under the influence of drugs at that time? Q: And what was the reply of the accused?
Q: What else did he tell you? A: He said yes, Sir.
A: I told him, What reason pushed you to do that thing? x x x Q: What else did you ask the accused?
Q: Please tell us in tagalog, the exact words that the accused used in telling you A: I remember that while asking him, he was crying as if feeling remorse on the
what happened. killing, Sir.
A: He told me that he saw the child as if she was headless at that time. That is why ....
he strangled the child, Sir. (Ang sabi niya po sa kin, nakita niya raw yung bata Q: And it was you who initiated the conversation?
na parang walang ulo na naglalakad. Kaya po sinakal niya.) A: Yes, Sir.
xxxxxx xxx Q: Do you usually do that?
COURT: A: Yes, Sir. We usually do that.
Q: When you told the accused that you will help him, what kind of help were you Q: Is that part of your procedure?
thinking at that time? A: It is not SOP. But for me alone, I want to know more about the case, Sir. And
A: I told him that if he will tell the truth, I could help give him legal counsel. any information either on the victim or from the suspect will help me personally.
Q: And what was the answer of the accused? Its not an SOP, Sir.
A: Yes, he will tell me the truth, Your Honor. The confession, thus, can be likened to one freely and voluntarily given to an ordinary
In People vs. Mantung,l this Court said: individual and is, therefore, admissible as evidence.
Never was it raised during the trial that Mantungs admission during the Third. The admissibility of the extrajudicial confessions of accused-appellant is also
press conference was coerced or made under duress. As the records show, attacked on the ground that these were extracted from him by means of torture, beatings,
accused-appellant voluntarily made the statements in response to Mayor and threats to his life. The bare assertions of maltreatment by the police authorities in
Marquez question as to whether he killed the pawnshop employees. Mantung extracting confessions from the accused are not sufficient. The standing rule is that
answered in the affirmative and even proceeded to explain that he killed the where the defendants did not present evidence of compulsion, or duress nor violence on
victims because they made him eat pork. These circumstances hardly indicate their person; where they failed to complain to the officer who administered their oaths;
that Mantung felt compelled to own up to the crime. Besides, he could have where they did not institute any criminal or administrative action against their alleged
 7

intimidators for maltreatment; where there appeared to be no marks of violence on their A: It was painful, Sir.
bodies; and where they did not have themselves examined by a reputable physician to Q: In what part of your body were you pricked by a needle?
buttress their claim, all these will be considered as indicating voluntariness.liii Indeed, A: At my private part, Sir.
extrajudicial confessions are presumed to be voluntary, and, in the absence of conclusive These bare assertions cannot be given weight. Accused-appellant testified that he
evidence showing that the declarants consent in executing the same has been vitiated, was made to stay in the municipal hall from 10:00 oclock in the morning until 11:00
the confession will be sustained.liv oclock that night of July 10, 1999, during which time he was boxed, tortured, and hit with
Accused-appellants claim that he was tortured and subjected to beatings by a piece of wood by policemen to make him admit to the crime. However, accused-
policemen in order to extract the said confession from him is unsupported by any proof: lv appellant was physically examined by Dr. Antonio Vertido at about 9:00 oclock in the
ATTY. ESPIRITU: evening of the same day. While the results show that accused-appellant did sustain
Q: Did they further interrogate you? injuries, the same are incompatible with his claim of torture. As Dr. Vertido testified:lvi
A: Yes, sir. PROSECUTOR LU:
Q: What else did they ask you? Q: What were your findings when you conducted the physical examination of the
A: They were asking me the project, Sir. suspect?
Q: What else? A: I found abrasions, your Honor, abrasions on the thigh, knees, legs and feet of
A: That is the only thing, Sir. the suspect, and I also found hematoma on the left ring finger, posterior aspect
Q: Who was doing the questioning? and at the same time, a laceration on the left ring finger.
A: The investigator, Sir. xxxxxx xxx
Q: How many were they inside that room? Q: In your findings, it appears that the accused in this case suffered certain
A: Five, Sir. physical injuries on his person like this abrasion on the thigh, right anterior
Q: They are all policemen? lateral aspect lower third of the knee, what could have caused this injury?
A: Yes, Sir. A: Abrasions are usually caused when the skin comes in contact with a rough
xxxxxx xxx surface, Sir. Hematoma are usually caused by a blunt instrument or object and
Q: Until what time did they keep you inside that room? laceration is the forcible contact of the skin from that blunt object.
A: Up to 11:00 in the evening, Sir. Q: I am particularly interested in your findings hematoma on the left ring finger,
Q: Between 10:30 in the morning up to 11:00 oclock in the evening, what did you posterior aspect and laceration left ring finger posterior aspect, what could have
do there? caused those injuries on the accused?
A: They were interrogating and forcing me to admit something, Sir. A: My opinion to these hematoma and laceration found on the said left ring finger
Q: In what way did they force you to admit something? was that it was caused by a bite, Sir.
A: They were mauling me, Sir. If the account of accused-appellant that he was beaten up is true, Dr. Antonio
Q: The 5 of them? Vertido would have found more than mere abrasions and hematoma on his left finger. Dr.
A: Yes, Sir. Vertidos findings are more consistent with the theory that accused-appellant sustained
Q: The 5 of them remained inside that room with you throughout the questioning? physical injuries as a result of the struggle made by the victim during the commission of
A: Yes, Sir. the rape in the compuerta.
Q: In what way did they hurt you? At all events, even if accused-appellant was truthful and his assailed confessions
A: They burned my private part with a lighted cigarette butt and pierced me with a are inadmissible, the circumstantial evidence, as already shown, is sufficient to establish
needle, Sir. his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution witnesses presented a mosaic of
Q: Who did these things to you? circumstances showing accused-appellants guilt. Their testimonies rule out the possibility
A: Mercado, Sir. that the crime was the handiwork of some other evil mind. These witnesses have not
Q: Who is this Mercado? been shown to have been motivated by ill will against accused-appellant.
A: EPZA policemen, Sir. On the other hand, no other witness not related to accused-appellant was ever
Q: Did the other policemen help in doing these things to you? called to corroborate his claim. The defense presented only accused-appellants sister,
A: No, Sir. Aimee Vallejo, to corroborate his story. We have held time and again that alibi cannot
Q: Were you asked to undress or you were forced to do that? prosper if it is established mainly by the accused and his relatives, and not by credible
A: They forced me to remove my clothes, Sir. persons.lvii It is well settled that alibi is the weakest of all defenses as it is easy to contrive
Q: In what way did they force you to remove your clothes? and difficult to disprove. For this reason, this Court looks with caution upon the defense
A: They were asking me to take off the pants which I was wearing at the time, Sir. of alibi, especially when, as in this case, it is corroborated only by relatives or friends of
Q: Did they do anything to you to force you to remove your pants? the accused.lviii
A: Yes, Sir. Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code provides that When by reason or on the
Q: What? occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.lix Therefore, no
A: They boxed me, Sir. other penalty can be imposed on accused-appellant.
Q: What else, if any? WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing considerations, the decision of the
A: They hit me with a piece of wood, Sir. Regional Trial Court, Branch 88, Cavite City, finding accused-appellant Gerrico Vallejo y
Q: What did you feel when your private part was burned with a cigarette butt? Samartino GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape with Homicide and
 8

sentencing him to the supreme penalty of DEATH and directing him to indemnify the Order, and to submit the results thereof within a period of ninety (90) days
heirs of the victim in the amount of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as from completion. The parties are further reminded of the hearing set on 24
moral damages, is hereby AFFIRMED. February 2000 for the reception of other evidence in support of the petition.
In accordance with Section 25 of R.A. 7659, amending Art. 83 of the Revised Penal IT IS SO ORDERED.[5] (Emphasis in the original)
Code, upon the finality of this decision, let the records of this case be forthwith forwarded Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the 3 February 2000 Order. He
to the President of the Philippines for the possible exercise of the pardoning power. asserted that under the present circumstances, the DNA test [he] is compelled to take
SO ORDERED. would be inconclusive, irrelevant and the coercive process to obtain the requisite
Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, specimen, unconstitutional.
Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, and In an Order dated 8 June 2000, the trial court denied petitioners motion for
Corona, JJ., concur. reconsideration.[6]
De Leon, Jr., J., abroad, on official business. On 18 July 2000, petitioner filed before the appellate court a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. He asserted that the trial court
rendered the Orders dated 3 February 2000 and 8 June 2000 in excess of, or without
jurisdiction and/or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
[G.R. No. 148220. June 15, 2005] jurisdiction. Petitioner further contended that there is no appeal nor any [other] plain,
ROSENDO HERRERA, petitioner, vs. ROSENDO ALBA, minor, represented by his adequate and speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law. Petitioner maintained his
mother ARMI A. ALBA, and HON. NIMFA CUESTA-VILCHES, Presiding previous objections to the taking of DNA paternity testing. He submitted the following
Judge, Branch 48, Regional Trial Court, Manila, respondents. grounds to support his objection:
DECISION 1. Public respondent misread and misapplied the ruling in Lim vs. Court of
CARPIO, J.: Appeals (270 SCRA 2).
The Case 2. Public respondent ruled to accept DNA test without considering the
This is a petition for review[1] to set aside the Decision[2] dated 29 November 2000 limitations on, and conditions precedent for the admissibility of DNA
of the Court of Appeals (appellate court) in CA-G.R. SP No. 59766. The appellate court testing and ignoring the serious constraints affecting the reliability of the
affirmed two Orders[3] issued by Branch 48 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila (trial test as admitted by private respondents expert witness.
court) in SP No. 98-88759. The Order dated 3 February 2000 directed Rosendo Herrera 3. Subject Orders lack legal and factual support, with public respondent
(petitioner) to submit to deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) paternity testing, while the Order relying on scientific findings and conclusions unfit for judicial notice and
dated 8 June 2000 denied petitioners motion for reconsideration. unsupported by experts in the field and scientific treatises.
The Facts 4. Under the present circumstances the DNA testing petitioner [is] compelled
On 14 May 1998, then thirteen-year-old Rosendo Alba (respondent), represented to take will be inconclusive, irrelevant and the coercive process to obtain
by his mother Armi Alba, filed before the trial court a petition for compulsory recognition, the requisite specimen from the petitioner, unconstitutional. [7]
support and damages against petitioner. On 7 August 1998, petitioner filed his answer The Ruling of the Court of Appeals
with counterclaim where he denied that he is the biological father of respondent. On 29 November 2000, the appellate court issued a decision denying the petition
Petitioner also denied physical contact with respondents mother. and affirming the questioned Orders of the trial court. The appellate court stated that
Respondent filed a motion to direct the taking of DNA paternity testing to abbreviate petitioner merely desires to correct the trial courts evaluation of evidence. Thus, appeal is
the proceedings. To support the motion, respondent presented the testimony of an available remedy for an error of judgment that the court may commit in the exercise of
Saturnina C. Halos, Ph.D. When she testified, Dr. Halos was an Associate Professor at its jurisdiction. The appellate court also stated that the proposed DNA paternity testing
De La Salle University where she taught Cell Biology. She was also head of the does not violate his right against self-incrimination because the right applies only to
University of the Philippines Natural Sciences Research Institute (UP-NSRI), a DNA testimonial compulsion. Finally, the appellate court pointed out that petitioner can still
analysis laboratory. She was a former professor at the University of the Philippines in refute a possible adverse result of the DNA paternity testing. The dispositive portion of
Diliman, Quezon City, where she developed the Molecular Biology Program and taught the appellate courts decision reads:
Molecular Biology. In her testimony, Dr. Halos described the process for DNA paternity WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the Petition is hereby
testing and asserted that the test had an accuracy rate of 99.9999% in establishing DENIED DUE COURSE, and ordered dismissed, and the challenged orders of
paternity.[4] the Trial Court AFFIRMED, with costs to Petitioner.
Petitioner opposed DNA paternity testing and contended that it has not gained SO ORDERED.[8]
acceptability. Petitioner further argued that DNA paternity testing violates his right against Petitioner moved for reconsideration, which the appellate court denied in its
self-incrimination. Resolution dated 23 May 2001.[9]
The Ruling of the Trial Court Issues
In an Order dated 3 February 2000, the trial court granted respondents motion to Petitioner raises the issue of whether a DNA test is a valid probative tool in this
conduct DNA paternity testing on petitioner, respondent and Armi Alba. Thus: jurisdiction to determine filiation. Petitioner asks for the conditions under which DNA
In view of the foregoing, the motion of the petitioner is GRANTED and technology may be integrated into our judicial system and the prerequisites for the
the relevant individuals, namely: the petitioner, the minor child, and admissibility of DNA test results in a paternity suit.[10]
respondent are directed to undergo DNA paternity testing in a laboratory of Petitioner further submits that the appellate court gravely abused its discretion
their common choice within a period of thirty (30) days from receipt of the when it authorized the trial court to embark in [sic] a new procedure xxx to determine
 9

filiation despite the absence of legislation to ensure its reliability and integrity, want of (1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final
official recognition as made clear in Lim vs. Court of Appeals and the presence of judgment; or
technical and legal constraints in respect of [sic] its implementation. [11] Petitioner (2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a
maintains that the proposed DNA paternity testing violates his right against self- private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent
incrimination.[12] concerned.
The Ruling of the Court In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be
The petition has no merit. proved by:
Before discussing the issues on DNA paternity testing, we deem it appropriate to (1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a
give an overview of a paternity suit and apply it to the facts of this case. We shall legitimate child; or
consider the requirements of the Family Code and of the Rules of Evidence to establish (2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special
paternity and filiation. laws.
An Overview of the Paternity and Filiation Suit The Rules on Evidence include provisions on pedigree. The relevant sections of
Filiation proceedings are usually filed not just to adjudicate paternity but also to Rule 130 provide:
secure a legal right associated with paternity, such as citizenship,[13] support (as in the SEC. 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.The act or declaration of a
present case), or inheritance. The burden of proving paternity is on the person who person deceased, or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another
alleges that the putative father is the biological father of the child. There are four person related to him by birth or marriage, may be received in evidence where
significant procedural aspects of a traditional paternity action which parties have to face: it occurred before the controversy, and the relationship between the two
a prima facie case, affirmative defenses, presumption of legitimacy, and physical persons is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration. The word
resemblance between the putative father and child.[14] pedigree includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the
A prima facie case exists if a woman declares that she had sexual relations with the dates when and the places where these facts occurred, and the names of the
putative father. In our jurisdiction, corroborative proof is required to carry the burden relatives. It embraces also facts of family history intimately connected with
forward and shift it to the putative father.[15] pedigree.
There are two affirmative defenses available to the putative father. The putative SEC. 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.The
father may show incapability of sexual relations with the mother, because of either reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy, in
physical absence or impotency.[16] The putative father may also show that the mother respect to the pedigree of any one of its members, may be received in
had sexual relations with other men at the time of conception. evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the family,
A child born to a husband and wife during a valid marriage is presumed either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles or other family books
legitimate.[17] The childs legitimacy may be impugned only under the strict standards or charts, engraving on rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as
provided by law.[18] evidence of pedigree.
Finally, physical resemblance between the putative father and child may be offered This Courts rulings further specify what incriminating acts are acceptable as
as part of evidence of paternity. Resemblance is a trial technique unique to a paternity evidence to establish filiation. In Pe Lim v. CA,[20] a case petitioner often cites, we stated
proceeding. However, although likeness is a function of heredity, there is no that the issue of paternity still has to be resolved by such conventional evidence as the
mathematical formula that could quantify how much a child must or must not look like his relevant incriminating verbal and written acts by the putative father. Under Article 278 of
biological father.[19] This kind of evidence appeals to the emotions of the trier of fact. the New Civil Code, voluntary recognition by a parent shall be made in the record of
In the present case, the trial court encountered three of the four aspects. Armi Alba, birth, a will, a statement before a court of record, or in any authentic writing. To be
respondents mother, put forward a prima facie case when she asserted that petitioner is effective, the claim of filiation must be made by the putative father himself and the writing
respondents biological father. Aware that her assertion is not enough to convince the trial must be the writing of the putative father.[21] A notarial agreement to support a child
court, she offered corroborative proof in the form of letters and pictures. Petitioner, on the whose filiation is admitted by the putative father was considered acceptable evidence.[22]
other hand, denied Armi Albas assertion. He denied ever having sexual relations with Letters to the mother vowing to be a good father to the child and pictures of the putative
Armi Alba and stated that respondent is Armi Albas child with another man. Armi Alba father cuddling the child on various occasions, together with the certificate of live birth,
countered petitioners denial by submitting pictures of respondent and petitioner side by proved filiation.[23] However, a student permanent record, a written consent to a fathers
side, to show how much they resemble each other. operation, or a marriage contract where the putative father gave consent, cannot be
Paternity and filiation disputes can easily become credibility contests. We now look taken as authentic writing.[24] Standing alone, neither a certificate of baptism[25] nor family
to the law, rules, and governing jurisprudence to help us determine what evidence of pictures[26] are sufficient to establish filiation.
incriminating acts on paternity and filiation are allowed in this jurisdiction. So far, the laws, rules, and jurisprudence seemingly limit evidence of paternity and
Laws, Rules, and Jurisprudence filiation to incriminating acts alone. However, advances in science show that sources of
Establishing Filiation evidence of paternity and filiation need not be limited to incriminating acts. There is now
The relevant provisions of the Family Code provide as follows: almost universal scientific agreement that blood grouping tests are conclusive on non-
ART. 175. Illegitimate children may establish their illegitimate filiation in paternity, although inconclusive on paternity.[27]
the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children. In Co Tao v. Court of Appeals,[28] the result of the blood grouping test showed that
xxx the putative father was a possible father of the child. Paternity was imputed to the
ART. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the putative father after the possibility of paternity was proven on presentation during trial of
following: facts and circumstances other than the results of the blood grouping test.
 10

In Jao v. Court of Appeals,[29] the child, the mother, and the putative father agreed same, the DNA or fingerprint is deemed to be a match. But then, even if only
to submit themselves to a blood grouping test. The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) one feature of the DNA or fingerprint is different, it is deemed not to have
conducted the test, which indicated that the child could not have been the possible come from the suspect.
offspring of the mother and the putative father. We held that the result of the blood As earlier stated, certain regions of human DNA show variations
grouping test was conclusive on the non-paternity of the putative father. between people. In each of these regions, a person possesses two genetic
The present case asks us to go one step further. We are now asked whether DNA types called allele, one inherited from each parent. In [a] paternity test, the
analysis may be admitted as evidence to prove paternity. forensic scientist looks at a number of these variable regions in an individual
DNA Analysis as Evidence to produce a DNA profile. Comparing next the DNA profiles of the mother and
DNA is the fundamental building block of a persons entire genetic make-up. DNA is child, it is possible to determine which half of the childs DNA was inherited
found in all human cells and is the same in every cell of the same person. Genetic from the mother. The other half must have been inherited from the biological
identity is unique. Hence, a persons DNA profile can determine his identity.[30] father. The alleged fathers profile is then examined to ascertain whether he
DNA analysis is a procedure in which DNA extracted from a biological sample has the DNA types in his profile, which match the paternal types in the child. If
obtained from an individual is examined. The DNA is processed to generate a pattern, or the mans DNA types do not match that of the child, the man is excluded as
a DNA profile, for the individual from whom the sample is taken. This DNA profile is the father. If the DNA types match, then he is not excluded as the father.[32]
unique for each person, except for identical twins.[31] We quote relevant portions of the (Emphasis in the original)
trial courts 3 February 2000 Order with approval: Although the term DNA testing was mentioned in the 1995 case of People v.
Everyone is born with a distinct genetic blueprint called DNA Teehankee, Jr.,[33] it was only in the 2001 case of Tijing v. Court of Appeals[34] that
(deoxyribonucleic acid). It is exclusive to an individual (except in the rare more than a passing mention was given to DNA analysis. In Tijing, we issued a writ of
occurrence of identical twins that share a single, fertilized egg), and DNA is habeas corpus against respondent who abducted petitioners youngest son. Testimonial
unchanging throughout life. Being a component of every cell in the human and documentary evidence and physical resemblance were used to establish parentage.
body, the DNA of an individuals blood is the very DNA in his or her skin cells, However, we observed that:
hair follicles, muscles, semen, samples from buccal swabs, saliva, or other Parentage will still be resolved using conventional methods unless we adopt
body parts. the modern and scientific ways available. Fortunately, we have now the facility
The chemical structure of DNA has four bases. They are known as A and expertise in using DNA test for identification and parentage testing. The
(adenine), G (guanine), C (cystosine) and T (thymine). The order in which the University of the Philippines Natural Science Research Institute (UP-NSRI)
four bases appear in an individuals DNA determines his or her physical DNA Analysis Laboratory has now the capability to conduct DNA typing using
makeup. And since DNA is a double-stranded molecule, it is composed of two short tandem repeat (STR) analysis. xxx For it was said, that courts should
specific paired bases, A-T or T-A and G-C or C-G. These are called genes. apply the results of science when completely obtained in aid of situations
Every gene has a certain number of the above base pairs distributed in a presented, since to reject said result is to deny progress. Though it is not
particular sequence. This gives a person his or her genetic code. Somewhere necessary in this case to resort to DNA testing, in [the] future it would be
in the DNA framework, nonetheless, are sections that differ. They are known useful to all concerned in the prompt resolution of parentage and identity
as polymorphic loci, which are the areas analyzed in DNA typing (profiling, issues.
tests, fingerprinting, or analysis/DNA fingerprinting/genetic tests or Admissibility of
fingerprinting). In other words, DNA typing simply means determining the DNA Analysis as Evidence
polymorphic loci. The 2002 case of People v. Vallejo[35] discussed DNA analysis as evidence. This
How is DNA typing performed? From a DNA sample obtained or may be considered a 180 degree turn from the Courts wary attitude towards DNA testing
extracted, a molecular biologist may proceed to analyze it in several ways. in the 1997 Pe Lim case,[36] where we stated that DNA, being a relatively new science,
There are five (5) techniques to conduct DNA typing. They are: the RFLP xxx has not yet been accorded official recognition by our courts. In Vallejo, the DNA
(restriction fragment length polymorphism); reverse dot blot or HLA DQ a/Pm profile from the vaginal swabs taken from the rape victim matched the accuseds DNA
loci which was used in 287 cases that were admitted as evidence by 37 courts profile. We affirmed the accuseds conviction of rape with homicide and sentenced him to
in the U.S. as of November 1994; mtDNA process; VNTR (variable number death. We declared:
tandem repeats); and the most recent which is known as the PCR- In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, therefore, courts
([polymerase] chain reaction) based STR (short tandem repeats) method should consider, among other things, the following data: how the samples
which, as of 1996, was availed of by most forensic laboratories in the world. were collected, how they were handled, the possibility of contamination of the
PCR is the process of replicating or copying DNA in an evidence sample a samples, the procedure followed in analyzing the samples, whether the proper
million times through repeated cycling of a reaction involving the so-called standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests, and the
DNA polymerize enzyme. STR, on the other hand, takes measurements in 13 qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. [37]
separate places and can match two (2) samples with a reported theoretical Vallejo discussed the probative value, not admissibility, of DNA evidence. By 2002,
error rate of less than one (1) in a trillion. there was no longer any question on the validity of the use of DNA analysis as evidence.
Just like in fingerprint analysis, in DNA typing, matches are determined. The Court moved from the issue of according official recognition to DNA analysis as
To illustrate, when DNA or fingerprint tests are done to identify a suspect in a evidence to the issue of observance of procedures in conducting DNA analysis.
criminal case, the evidence collected from the crime scene is compared with In 2004, there were two other cases that had a significant impact on jurisprudence
the known print. If a substantial amount of the identifying features are the on DNA testing: People v. Yatar[38] and In re: The Writ of Habeas Corpus for
 11

Reynaldo de Villa.[39] In Yatar, a match existed between the DNA profile of the semen Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence governing expert testimony provides:
found in the victim and the DNA profile of the blood sample given by appellant in open If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact
court. The Court, following Vallejos footsteps, affirmed the conviction of appellant to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified
because the physical evidence, corroborated by circumstantial evidence, showed as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may
appellant guilty of rape with homicide. In De Villa, the convict-petitioner presented DNA testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.
test results to prove that he is not the father of the child conceived at the time of Daubert cautions that departure from the Frye standard of general acceptance
commission of the rape. The Court ruled that a difference between the DNA profile of the does not mean that the Federal Rules do not place limits on the admissibility of scientific
convict-petitioner and the DNA profile of the victims child does not preclude the convict- evidence. Rather, the judge must ensure that the testimonys reasoning or method is
petitioners commission of rape. scientifically valid and is relevant to the issue. Admissibility would depend on factors such
In the present case, the various pleadings filed by petitioner and respondent refer to as (1) whether the theory or technique can be or has been tested; (2) whether the theory
two United States cases to support their respective positions on the admissibility of DNA or technique has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) the known or
analysis as evidence: Frye v. U.S.[40] and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.[41] potential rate of error; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling the
In Frye v. U.S., the trial court convicted Frye of murder. Frye appealed his conviction to techniques operation; and (5) whether the theory or technique is generally accepted in
the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. During trial, Fryes counsel offered an the scientific community.
expert witness to testify on the result of a systolic blood pressure deception test [42] made Another product liability case, Kumho Tires Co. v. Carmichael,[46] further modified
on defendant. The state Supreme Court affirmed Fryes conviction and ruled that the the Daubert standard. This led to the amendment of Rule 702 in 2000 and which now
systolic blood pressure deception test has not yet gained such standing and scientific reads as follows:
recognition among physiological and psychological authorities as would justify the courts If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier
in admitting expert testimony deduced from the discovery, development, and of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness
experiments thus far made. The Frye standard of general acceptance states as follows: qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education,
Just when a scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony
experimental and demonstrable stages is difficult to define. Somewhere in this is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of
twilight zone the evidential force of the principle must be recognized, and reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles
while courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
well recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the We now determine the applicability in this jurisdiction of these American cases.
deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general Obviously, neither the Frye-Schwartz standard nor the Daubert-Kumho standard is
acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs. controlling in the Philippines.[47] At best, American jurisprudence merely has a persuasive
In 1989, State v. Schwartz[43] modified the Frye standard. Schwartz was charged effect on our decisions. Here, evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the fact in
with stabbing and murder. Bloodstained articles and blood samples of the accused and issue and is not otherwise excluded by statute or the Rules of Court.[48] Evidence is
the victim were submitted for DNA testing to a government facility and a private facility. relevant when it has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence
The prosecution introduced the private testing facilitys results over Schwartzs objection. or non-existence.[49] Section 49 of Rule 130, which governs the admissibility of expert
One of the issues brought before the state Supreme Court included the admissibility of testimony, provides as follows:
DNA test results in a criminal proceeding. The state Supreme Court concluded that: The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
While we agree with the trial court that forensic DNA typing has gained experience or training which he is shown to possess may be received in
general acceptance in the scientific community, we hold that admissibility of evidence.
specific test results in a particular case hinges on the laboratorys compliance This Rule does not pose any legal obstacle to the admissibility of DNA analysis as
with appropriate standards and controls, and the availability of their testing evidence. Indeed, even evidence on collateral matters is allowed when it tends in any
data and results.[44] reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. [50]
In 1993, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.[45] further modified the Indeed, it would have been convenient to merely refer petitioner to our decisions in
Frye-Schwartz standard. Daubert was a product liability case where both the trial and Tijing, Vallejo and Yatar to illustrate that DNA analysis is admissible as evidence. In our
appellate courts denied the admissibility of an experts testimony because it failed to meet jurisdiction, the restrictive tests for admissibility established by Frye-Schwartz and
the Frye standard of general acceptance. The United States Supreme Court ruled that in Daubert-Kumho go into the weight of the evidence.
federal trials, the Federal Rules of Evidence have superseded the Frye standard. Rule Probative Value of
401 defines relevant evidence, while Rule 402 provides the foundation for admissibility of DNA Analysis as Evidence
evidence. Thus: Despite our relatively liberal rules on admissibility, trial courts should be cautious in
Rule 401. Relevant evidence is defined as that which has any tendency giving credence to DNA analysis as evidence. We reiterate our statement in Vallejo:
to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, therefore, courts
of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the should consider, among other things, the following data: how the samples
evidence. were collected, how they were handled, the possibility of contamination of the
Rule 402. All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise samples, the procedure followed in analyzing the samples, whether the proper
provided by the Constitution of the United States, by Act of Congress, by standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests, and the
these rules, or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests.[51]
statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible. We also repeat the trial courts explanation of DNA analysis used in paternity cases:
 12

In [a] paternity test, the forensic scientist looks at a number of these variable the right of the putative parent to claim his or her own defenses. [57] Where the evidence
regions in an individual to produce a DNA profile. Comparing next the DNA to aid this investigation is obtainable through the facilities of modern science and
profiles of the mother and child, it is possible to determine which half of the technology, such evidence should be considered subject to the limits established by the
childs DNA was inherited from the mother. The other half must have been law, rules, and jurisprudence.
inherited from the biological father. The alleged fathers profile is then WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition. We AFFIRM the Decision of the Court of
examined to ascertain whether he has the DNA types in his profile, which Appeals dated 29 November 2000 in CA-G.R. SP No. 59766. We also AFFIRM the
match the paternal types in the child. If the mans DNA types do not match that Orders dated 3 February 2000 and 8 June 2000 issued by Branch 48 of the Regional
of the child, the man is excluded as the father. If the DNA types match, then Trial Court of Manila in Civil Case No. SP-98-88759.
he is not excluded as the father.[52] SO ORDERED.
It is not enough to state that the childs DNA profile matches that of the putative father. A Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, and Azcuna, JJ.,
complete match between the DNA profile of the child and the DNA profile of the putative concur.
father does not necessarily establish paternity. For this reason, following the highest
standard adopted in an American jurisdiction,[53] trial courts should require at least 99.9% G.R. No. L-1967 May 28, 1951
as a minimum value of the Probability of Paternity (W) prior to a paternity inclusion. W is Probate of the will of the late Faustino Neri San Jose. PAZ NERI SAN
a numerical estimate for the likelihood of paternity of a putative father compared to the JOSE, petitioner.
probability of a random match of two unrelated individuals. An appropriate reference MATILDE MENCIANO, in her behalf and in behalf of the minors CARLO MAGNO
population database, such as the Philippine population database, is required to compute NERI and FAUSTINO NERI, Jr., plaintiffs-appellees,
for W. Due to the probabilistic nature of paternity inclusions, W will never equal to 100%. vs.
However, the accuracy of W estimates is higher when the putative father, mother and PAZ NERI SAN JOSE and RODOLFO PELAEZ, defendants-appellants.
child are subjected to DNA analysis compared to those conducted between the putative Claro M. Recto, Francisco R. Capistrano, Pelaez, Pelaez and Pelaez and Ernesto V.
father and child alone.[54] Chavez for appellants.
DNA analysis that excludes the putative father from paternity should be conclusive Pineda, Hermosisima and Neri for appellees.
proof of non-paternity. If the value of W is less than 99.9%, the results of the DNA JUGO, J.:
analysis should be considered as corroborative evidence. If the value of W is 99.9% or In the course of the proceedings for the settlement of the estate of the deceased
higher, then there is refutable presumption of paternity.[55] This refutable presumption of Faustino Neri San Jose, Special Proceedings No. 6-A of the Court First Instance of
paternity should be subjected to the Vallejo standards. Misamis Oriental, Matilde Menciano, in her behalf and in behalf of the minors Carlo
Right Against Magno Neri and Faustino Neri, Jr., filed a motion for declaration of heirs, alleging that
Self-Incrimination she is the widow of the deceased Faustino Neri San Jose, to whom she was married
Section 17, Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution provides that no person shall be according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church on September 28, 1944, before Rev.
compelled to be a witness against himself. Petitioner asserts that obtaining samples from Father Isaias Edralin, S. J.; that before the marriage the deceased and she lived together
him for DNA testing violates his right against self-incrimination. Petitioner ignores our as husband and wife, there having been no impediment to their marriage; that as a result
earlier pronouncements that the privilege is applicable only to testimonial evidence. of their cohabitation before the marriage the child Carlo Magno Neri was born on March
Again, we quote relevant portions of the trial courts 3 February 2000 Order with approval: 9, 1940 and was later baptized, said child having enjoyed the status of a recognized
Obtaining DNA samples from an accused in a criminal case or from the natural child; that their second child Faustino Neri, Jr., was born on April 24, 1945; and
respondent in a paternity case, contrary to the belief of respondent in this that Carlo Magno Neri was legitimized by the subsequent matrimony of his parents and
action, will not violate the right against self-incrimination. This privilege applies Faustino Neri, Jr., is a legitimate child born in lawful wedlock.
only to evidence that is communicative in essence taken under duress Paz Neri San Jose, then executrix of the estate of the deceased Faustino Neri San Jose,
(People vs. Olvis, 154 SCRA 513, 1987). The Supreme Court has ruled that and Rodolfo Pelaez, designated universal heir in the will of the deceased dated
the right against self-incrimination is just a prohibition on the use of physical or December 19, 1940, filed an amended answer with the permission of the court, in which
moral compulsion to extort communication (testimonial evidence) from a they denied the substantial allegations of the abovementioned motion for declaration of
defendant, not an exclusion of evidence taken from his body when it may be heirs and further alleged in substance that the deceased Faustino Neri San Jose, from
material. As such, a defendant can be required to submit to a test to extract the year 1943, was suffering from senile dementia caused by anemia which became
virus from his body (as cited in People vs. Olvis, Supra); the substance worse from September 9, 1944, when the Province of Misamis Oriental where the
emitting from the body of the accused was received as evidence for acts of deceased lived was bombarded by American planes; that the marriage between said
lasciviousness (US vs. Tan Teng, 23 Phil. 145); morphine forced out of the deceased and Matilde Menciano, if it was solemnized, was in violation of the legal
mouth was received as proof (US vs. Ong Siu Hong, 36 Phil. 735); an order provisions and requisites, for he (the deceased) was deprived of his free will due to his
by the judge for the witness to put on pair of pants for size was allowed age, sickness, and bombardment, and Matilde Menciano, taking advantage of the
(People vs. Otadora, 86 Phil. 244); and the court can compel a woman deceased's condition, by intrigue and threat of abandoning him, forced Neri by means of
accused of adultery to submit for pregnancy test (Villaflor vs. Summers, 41 deceit (dolo) and threat to marry her; and that the deceased was sterile, unable to
Phil. 62), since the gist of the privilege is the restriction on testimonial procreate, and was impotent and congenitally sterile, the same as his brothers
compulsion.[56] Anastasio, Filomeno, Pedro, and his sister Conchita, who had no children. The
The policy of the Family Code to liberalize the rule on the investigation of the defendants also filed a counterclaim for the sum of P286,000 in cash, and for jewels and
paternity and filiation of children, especially of illegitimate children, is without prejudice to
 13

certain properties, which, as alleged, were retained and illegally disposed of by Matilde of the hands or fingers of the person who affixed those signatures, which usually
Menciano. happens to a very sick man. In the case of Torres et al. vs. Lopez (48 Phil., 772), this
The above allegations of the parties give rise to the following issues: court made the following pronouncement:
(1) Was the marriage between the deceased Faustino Neri San Jose and 3. ID.; ID TESTS OF CAPACITY. — Neither old age, physical infirmities,
Matilde Menciano valid?; feebleness of mind, weakness of the memory, the appointment of a guardian,
(2) Are, the children Faustino Neri, Jr. and Carlo Magno Neri the legitimate nor eccentricities are sufficient singly or jointly to show testamentary incapacity.
children of the deceased Faustino Neri San Jose and Matilde Menciano?; and The nature and rationally of the will is of some practical utility in determining
(3) Did Matilde Menciano have in her possession and illegally disposed of the capacity. Each case rests on its own facts and must be decided by its own facts.
cash, jewels, and certain properties above mentioned? (Syllabus, p. 773.)
The marriage between the deceased and Matilde Menciano is evidenced by Exhibit I-C, xxx xxx xxx
which is an application for a marriage license, dated September 28, 1944, signed by 11. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. — On January 3, 1924, when the testator,
Faustino Neri San Jose, to marry Matilde Menciano; Exhibit 1-B, also an application for a Tomas Rodriguez, made his will, he was 76 years old, physically decrepit, weak
marriage license dated September 28, 1944, signed by Matilde Menciano, to marry of intellect, suffering from a loss of memory, had a guardian of his person and
Faustino Neri San Jose; Exhibit 1-D, certificate for immediate issuance of the marriage his person and his property, and was eccentric, but he still possessed that spark
license applied for, signed by the Acting Local Civil Registrar and Faustino Neri San Jose of reason and of life, that strength of mind to form a fixed intention and to
and Matilde Menciano; and Exhibit 1-A, the marriage contract signed by Faustino Neri summon his enfeebled thoughts to enforce that intention, which the law terms
San Jose and Matilde Menciano as contracting parties, Rev. Isaias Edralin, as "testamentary capacity." Two of the subscribing witnesses testified clearly to the
solemnizing officer, and the witnesses L. B. Castaños and Samson Pañgan. regular manner in which the will was executed, and one did not. The attending
As all the above four exhibits are official and public documents, their validity can be physicians and three other doctors who were present at the execution of the will
successfully assailed only by strong, clear, and convincing oral testimony. In the case expressed opinions entirely favorable to the capacity of the testator. Three other
of Arroyo vs. Granada (18 Phil, 484), it was held: members of the medical profession expressed opinions entirely unfavorable to
1. CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS; SUFFICIENCY OF PROOF. — To the capacity of the testator and certified that he was of unsound
justify the setting aside of an instrument solemnly executed and voluntarily mind. Held, That Tomas Rodriguez on January 3, 1924, possessed sufficient
delivered, upon the ground that its execution was obtained by false and mentality to make a will which would meet the legal test regarding testamentary
fraudulent representations, the proof must be clear and convincing. (Syllabus) capacity; that the proponents of the will have carried successfully the burden of
In the case of Sy Tiangco vs. Pablo and Apao (59 Phil., 119), this Court declared: proof and have shown him of sound mind on that date; and that it was reversible
1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT; EXECUTION; DENIAL OF ALLEGED SIGNER; error on the part of the trial court not to admit his will to probate. (Syllabus, p.
BURDEN OF PROOF. — Plaintiff's attorneys vigorously contend that when the 774)
plaintiff denied having signed the deed it was incumbent upon the defendants to In Sancho vs. Abella (58 Phil., 728), this court said:
can the witnesses thereto. The execution of a document that has been ratified 1. WILLS; PROBATE; CAPACITY TO MAKE A WILL. — Neither senile debility,
before a notary public cannot be disproved by the mere denial of the alleged nor deafness, nor blindness, nor poor memory, is by itself sufficient to establish
signer. No inference unfavorable to the defendant arises from their failure to call the presumption that the person suffering therefrom is not in the full enjoyment
the subscribing witnesses. (Syllabus) of his mental faculties, when there is sufficient evidence of his mental sanity at
Is the oral evidence presented by the defendants of sufficient force and weight to the time of the execution of the will.
overcome the above official documents? 2. ID.; ID.; ID.; — Neither the facts of her being given accommodations in a
The witnesses for the defendants testified in substance that the deceased Faustino Neri convent, nor the presence of the parish priest, nor a priest acting as a witness,
was so weak and sick that he could not even talk coherently and intelligibly. Their constitutes undue influence sufficient to justify the annulment of a legacy in
testimony is too sweeping, because they refer to a general period of time. There must favor of a bishop of a diocese, made in her will by a testatrix 88 years of age,
have been times when the deceased may have been unable to attend to business or suffering from defective eyesight and hearing, while she is stopping in a convent
even to converse on account of his sickness, and even Father Edralin did not solemnize within the aforesaid diocese. (Syllabi)
the marriage on a certain date on account of the weak condition of Faustino Neri and Although the above doctrine relates to testamentary capacity, there is no reason why it
waited for about two days to perform the ceremony when the old man, although should not be applied to the capacity to contract marriage, which requires the same
somewhat weak, had a clear mind. Father Edralin's testimony is strongly corroborated by mental condition. Consequently, the court below did not err in declaring valid the
the form of the signatures of Faustino Neri in the above mentioned Exhibits 1-A, 1-C, and marriage of Faustino Neri San Jose and Matilde Menciano.
1-D. A mere glance at those signatures will convince anyone that they could not have The next issue is whether Faustino Neri, Jr., and Carlo Magno Neri are legitimate
been written by a man who is almost unconscious and physically and intellectually children of the deceased Faustino Neri and Matilde Menciano. As above stated, the
incapacitated, as the defendants' witnesses represent him to have been. It should be deceased Faustino Neri and Matilde Menciano were married on September 28, 1944.
noted that his signature is complicated, containing many flourishes, such that it can not Faustino Neri, Jr., was born on April 24, 1945; that is, two hundred eight days, or more
be signed by one who is not of sound mind and of fair physical condition. He may have than one hundred eighty days, after the marriage, but less than three hundred days after
been sick at that time, but not to such a degree as to render him unconscious of what he the death of Faustino Neri San Jose which occurred on October 11, 1944. There is no
was doing. If the signatures of the deceased in Exhibits 1-A, 1-C, and 1-D are compared question that before and after the marriage, the deceased and Matilde Menciano co-
with each other it will be readily seen that they are practically uniform, which could not habitated.
have been accomplished by a man who is a nervous wreck. There is no sign of trembling Rule 123, section 68 (c), reads as follows:
 14

SEC. 68. Conclusive presumptions. — The following are instances of conclusive However, even considering the evidence as to sterility, it results that the examinations of
presumptions: the semen by Drs. Garcia and Marfori in 1940, to determine the existence of
xxx xxx xxx spermatozoa, do not establish that the deceased was sterile. According to medical
(c) The issue of a wife cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent, is jurisprudence, a man may not have spermatozoa at a certain time, but may have had it
indisputably presumed to be legitimate, if not born within the one hundred and previously or may have it subsequently to the examination. The examinations by Drs.
eighty days immediately succeeding the marriage, or after the expiration of Garcia and Marfori were made in 1940. From that time Faustino Neri San Jose cohabited
three hundred days following its dissolution; with Matilde Menciano until his death on October 11, 1944.
xxx xxx xxx Doctor Jose F. Marfori. testified as follows:
The above-quoted provision is so clear that it does not require interpretation or Q. How many times did you examine his seminal fluid? — A. Only once.
construction, but only application. Q. In other words, from the latter part of 1940 up to his death, you examined
The requirements for the conclusive presumption that Faustino Neri, Jr. is the legitimate only once his seminal fluid? — A. Yes, sir.
son of the legitimate marriage of the deceased Faustino Neri and Matilde Menciano exist Q. Is it not a fact that you cannot determine sterility or his inability to procreate
as above stated, with the possible exception of the requisite as to potency. with one examination? — A. It would have been better if there was an
Was the deceased Faustino Neri impotent during his cohabitation with Matilde examination of his seminal fluid every year.
Menciano? Q. But the truth is that today a man may lack spermatozoa in his seminal fluid,
Impotency being an abnormal condition should not be presumed. The presumption is in but much later it may appear? — A. That is possible. (P. 28, t. s. n., Gaane)
favor of potency. The best evidence that the deceased was potent is the statement of Dr. It should be noted that Doctor Marfori is a nephew-in-law of the deceased Faustino Neri.
Antonio Garcia that in order to get a specimen of the semen of the deceased Faustino With regard to the supposed examination made by Doctor Garcia in Cebu on December
Neri for examination as to its contents of spermatozoa, Faustino, following the doctor's 9, 1940, Cristobal Lopez, nephew of Faustino, testified that during said period,
advice, used a rubber sac, commonly called "condom", and a woman. The fact that the December, 1940, the deceased Neri never went out of Cagayan, Oriental Misamis. We
deceased was able to produce the specimen by said means shows conclusively that he cannot accord much weight to the testimony of Doctor Garcia that he made the
was potent. Impotency is not synonymous with sterility. Impotency is the physical inability examination.
to have sexual intercourse; it is different from sterility. But even supposing that said doctors made such examinations, still the result is
(1) Impotence, in Medical Jurisprudence. — Inability on the part of the male inconclusive, for the reasons above set forth, and cannot in any way overthrow the
organ of copulation to perform its proper function. Impotence applies only to conclusive presumption established by Rule 123, section 68 (c).
disorders affecting the functions of the organ of copulation, while sterility applies Carlo Magno Neri was born on March 9, 1940, that is, before the marriage. Both the
only to lack of fertility in the reproductive elements of either sex. (Dennis, deceased Faustino and Matilde Menciano free to marry without any legal impediment.
System of Surgery; Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Rawle's Third Revision, Vol. 11, p. However, the court below declared that Carlo Magno Neri has not been acknowledged
1514) as a natural child and, consequently, cannot be legitimized by the subsequent marriage
(2) Impotencia (L.) Impotence. of his parents. We cannot review this finding because the plaintiffs did not appeal.
Impotencia Coeundi, inability of the male to perform the sexual act. The defendants allege that Matilde Menciano is retaining or has illegally disposed of
Impotentia Erigendi, inability to have an erection of the penis.(The American P286,000, genuine Philippine currency, certain jewels, and documents. The trial court,
Illustrated Medical Dictionary, by Dorland 20th Edition, p. 721) after a careful and exhaustive review of the evidence, correctly reached the conclusion
i. Coeundi. Inability of the male to perform the sexual act. i. erigendi, impotence that such allegation has not been substantiated. Let us make a short analysis of the
due to the absence of the power of erection. (Stedman's Practical Medical defendants' evidence on this point.
Dictionary, p. 551) The principal witness for this claim was Rodolfo Pelaez, who testified that the deceased
(4) Impotence. Faustino in 1939 delivered to him the sum of P250,000 in small denominations to be
"3. Law & Med. Incapacity for sexual intercourse." (Webster's New International exchanged in a bank in Manila for bills of larger denominations as P500, etc. After having
Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged, p. 1251) exchanged it with the help of Representative Ozamis (dead on the date of the trial), he
(5) Impotency or Impotence. — Want of power for copulation, not mere sterility. returned to the province and delivered the sum to the deceased Neri. On cross-
The absence of complete power of copulation is an essential element to examination he was not able to say whether the bills he took to Manila in October, 1939,
constitute impotency. (31 C. J., P. 259) were treasury certificates or bank bills; that in July, 1944, he visited Cagayan and he saw
(6) Impotence. — Inability to perform the sexual act may be due to defective his uncle Faustino living with Matilde Menciano and Carlo Magno Neri in the house of a
organs from abnormal or incomplete development, or to deficient internal Chinaman on Calle Del Mar; that he saw the sum of P250,000 in a wooden aparador. But
secretions, or to disorders of the nervous system diminishing the libido. when he was asked whether he actually saw the money in the aparador, he said he was
Impotence may or may not be accompanied by sterility. (The Columbia so informed by his uncle. His testimony is hearsay. Furthermore, there is no reason why
Encyclopedia, 877) his uncle should have accounted to him for the money. His testimony is contradicted by
Consequently, the requisite of potency also existed. The necessary conclusion is that the that of Paz Neri San Jose, his mother, who stated that the deceased Faustino went to the
child Faustino Neri, Jr., is conclusively presumed to be the legitimate son of the house of the Chinaman on Calle Del Mar only to fetch certain document which he had left
deceased Faustino Neri with Matilde Menciano in lawful wedlock. there; that the deceased was not living in said house; that he went there now and play
The attorney for the plaintiffs correctly objected to the evidence regarding sterility and monte; that the deceased and herself were living in the house of one Tamparong; that
any other evidence as to paternity. The objection should not have been overruled. the deceased used to carry with him his money, jewels, and documents, in a sack,
wherever he went to play; that at the time of the air raid by the Americans, the deceased
 15

went to the house on Calle Del Mar carrying the said sack, but he returned to the house From the evidence adduced, the following acts were preponderantly
of Tamparong, leaving the sack in the house on Calle Del Mar, but after the air raid he established:
returned on the latter house to fetch the sack. This testimony of Paz Neri, who was a Sometime on May 22, 1988, the plaintiff married the defendant at the Manila
witness for the defendants and a co-defendant herself, contradicts in essential and Cathedral, . . . Intramuros Manila, as evidenced by their Marriage Contract.
important features that of Rodolfo Pelaez. (Exh. "A")
The testimony of Paz Neri would show that the deceased Neri was distrustful of relatives After the celebration of their marriage and wedding reception at the South Villa,
and friends when his funds were concerned. P250,000 in 1939 was quite a fortune in Makati, they went and proceeded to the house of defendant's mother.
itself and, consisting of cash, could have been easily disposed of. In 1939 nobody There, they slept together on the same bed in the same room for the first night
believed for certain that there would be war. Why then should the deceased have wanted of their married life.
to change the money for bigger denominations when he could have deposited it in a It is the version of the plaintiff, that contrary to her expectations, that as
nearby branch of the Philippine National Bank where the deceased could have gone, for, newlyweds they were supposed to enjoy making love, or having sexual
as alleged by the defendants, he even went to Cebu in 1940 for examination of his intercourse, with each other, the defendant just went to bed, slept on one side
seminal fluid? thereof, then turned his back and went to sleep . There was no sexual
It was testified to by Clotilde Galarrita de Labitad that Matilde Menciano showed to her intercourse between them during the first night. The same thing happened on
the sum of P284,000 in genuine Philippine currency and counted the money in her the second, third and fourth nights.
presence. This is unbelievable. Could she not have counted it without the presence of In an effort to have their honeymoon in a private place where they can enjoy
anybody and thus avoided the danger of theft or robbery? together during their first week as husband and wife, they went to Baguio City.
With regard to the jewels no satisfactory evidence was presented to prove that Matilde But, they did so together with her mother, an uncle, his mother and his nephew.
Menciano misappropriated them. She received and had in her possession a few jewels They were all invited by the defendant to join them. [T]hey stayed in Baguio City
given to her by the deceased Faustino for the benefit of the children. for four (4) days. But, during this period, there was no sexual intercourse
As to the revocation of the appointment of Paz Neri San Jose as executrix, the trial court between them, since the defendant avoided her by taking a long walk during
made a reasonable exercise of its discretion in setting it aside and appointing Matilde siesta time or by just sleeping on a rocking chair located at the living room. They
Menciano administratrix, in view of the hostility between them which would cause many slept together in the same room and on the same bed since May 22, 1988 until
incidental questions and delay in the termination of the proceedings if Paz Neri had March 15, 1989. But during this period, there was no attempt of sexual
continued as executrix. We see no reason for interfering in the case with the discretion of intercourse between them. [S]he claims, that she did not: even see her
the court. husband's private parts nor did he see hers.
The appellees contended that the court erred in not completely annulling the institution of Because of this, they submitted themselves for medical examinations to Dr.
universal heir, without considering Rodolfo Pelaez as a legatee. Inasmuch as the Eufemio Macalalag, a urologist at the Chinese General Hospital, on January 20,
plaintiffs did not appeal, they are bound by the decision of the trial court. 1989.
In view of the foregoing, the judgment appealed from is affirmed in all its parts, with costs The results of their physical examinations were that she is healthy, normal and
against the appellants. It is so ordered. still a virgin, while that of her husband's examination was kept confidential up to
Paras, Bengzon, C. J., Feria, Pablo, Montemayor and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur. this time. While no medicine was prescribed for her, the doctor prescribed
medications for her husband which was also kept confidential. No treatment
was given to her. For her husband, he was asked by the doctor to return but he
G.R. No. 119190 January 16, 1997 never did.
CHI MING TSOI, petitioner, The plaintiff claims, that the defendant is impotent, a closet homosexual as he
vs. did not show his penis. She said, that she had observed the defendant using an
COURT OF APPEALS and GINA LAO-TSOI, respondents. eyebrow pencil and sometimes the cleansing cream of his mother. And that,
according to her, the defendant married her, a Filipino citizen, to acquire or
maintain his residency status here in the country and to publicly maintain the
TORRES, JR., J.: appearance of a normal man.
Man has not invented a reliable compass by which to steer a marriage in its journey over The plaintiff is not willing to reconcile with her husband.
troubled waters. Laws are seemingly inadequate. Over time, much reliance has been On the other hand, it is the claim of the defendant that if their marriage shall be
placed in the works of the unseen hand of Him who created all things. annulled by reason of psychological incapacity, the fault lies with his wife.
Who is to blame when a marriage fails? But, he said that he does not want his marriage with his wife annulled for
This case was originally commenced by a distraught wife against her uncaring husband several reasons, viz: (1) that he loves her very much; (2) that he has no defect
in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City (Branch 89) which decreed the annulment of on his part and he is physically and psychologically capable; and, (3) since the
the marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity. Petitioner appealed the decision relationship is still very young and if there is any differences between the two of
of the trial court to respondent Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 42758) which affirmed them, it can still be reconciled and that, according to him, if either one of them
the Trial Court's decision November 29, 1994 and correspondingly denied the motion for has some incapabilities, there is no certainty that this will not be cured. He
reconsideration in a resolution dated February 14, 1995. further claims, that if there is any defect, it can be cured by the intervention of
The statement of the case and of the facts made by the trial court and reproduced by the medical technology or science.
Court of Appeals1 its decision are as follows:
 16

The defendant admitted that since their marriage on May 22, 1988, until their We find the petition to be bereft of merit.
separation on March 15, 1989, there was no sexual contact between them. But, Petitioner contends that being the plaintiff in Civil Case No. Q-89-3141, private
the reason for this, according to the defendant, was that everytime he wants to respondent has the burden of proving the allegations in her complaint; that since there
have sexual intercourse with his wife, she always avoided him and whenever he was no independent evidence to prove the alleged non-coitus between the parties, there
caresses her private parts, she always removed his hands. The defendant remains no other basis for the court's conclusion except the admission of petitioner; that
claims, that he forced his wife to have sex with him only once but he did not public policy should aid acts intended to validate marriage and should retard acts
continue because she was shaking and she did not like it. So he stopped. intended to invalidate them; that the conclusion drawn by the trial court on the
There are two (2) reasons, according to the defendant , why the plaintiff filed admissions and confessions of the parties in their pleadings and in the course of the trial
this case against him, and these are: (1) that she is afraid that she will be forced is misplaced since it could have been a product of collusion; and that in actions for
to return the pieces of jewelry of his mother, and, (2) that her husband, the annulment of marriage, the material facts alleged in the complaint shall always be
defendant, will consummate their marriage. proved.3
The defendant insisted that their marriage will remain valid because they are Section 1, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court reads:
still very young and there is still a chance to overcome their differences. Section 1. Judgment on the pleadings. — Where an answer fails to tender an
The defendant submitted himself to a physical examination. His penis was issue, or otherwise admits the material allegations of the adverse party's
examined by Dr. Sergio Alteza, Jr., for the purpose of finding out whether he is pleading, the court may, on motion of that party, direct judgment on such
impotent . As a result thereof, Dr. Alteza submitted his Doctor's Medical Report. pleading. But in actions for annulment of marriage or for legal separation the
(Exh. "2"). It is stated there, that there is no evidence of impotency (Exh. "2-B"), material facts alleged in the complaint shall always be proved.
and he is capable of erection. (Exh. "2-C") The foregoing provision pertains to a judgment on the pleadings. What said provision
The doctor said, that he asked the defendant to masturbate to find out whether seeks to prevent is annulment of marriage without trial. The assailed decision was not
or not he has an erection and he found out that from the original size of two (2) based on such a judgment on the pleadings. When private respondent testified under
inches, or five (5) centimeters, the penis of the defendant lengthened by one (1) oath before the trial court and was cross-examined by oath before the trial court and was
inch and one centimeter. Dr. Alteza said, that the defendant had only a soft cross-examined by the adverse party, she thereby presented evidence in form of a
erection which is why his penis is not in its full length. But, still is capable of testimony. After such evidence was presented, it be came incumbent upon petitioner to
further erection, in that with his soft erection, the defendant is capable of having present his side. He admitted that since their marriage on May 22, 1988, until their
sexual intercourse with a woman. separation on March 15, 1989, there was no sexual intercourse between them.
In open Court, the Trial Prosecutor manifested that there is no collusion To prevent collusion between the parties is the reason why, as stated by the petitioner,
between the parties and that the evidence is not fabricated."2 the Civil Code provides that no judgment annulling a marriage shall be promulgated upon
After trial, the court rendered judgment, the dispositive portion of which reads: a stipulation of facts or by confession of judgment (Arts. 88 and 101[par. 2]) and the
ACCORDINGLY, judgment is hereby rendered declaring as VOID the marriage Rules of Court prohibit such annulment without trial (Sec. 1, Rule 19).
entered into by the plaintiff with the defendant on May 22, 1988 at the Manila The case has reached this Court because petitioner does not want their marriage to be
Cathedral, Basilica of the Immaculate Conception, Intramuros, Manila, before annulled. This only shows that there is no collusion between the parties. When petitioner
the Rt. Rev. Msgr. Melencio de Vera. Without costs. Let a copy of this decision admitted that he and his wife (private respondent) have never had sexual contact with
be furnished the Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City. Let another copy be each other, he must have been only telling the truth. We are reproducing the relevant
furnished the Local Civil Registrar of Manila. portion of the challenged resolution denying petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration,
SO ORDERED. penned with magisterial lucidity by Associate Justice Minerva Gonzaga-Reyes, viz:
On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision. The judgment of the trial court which was affirmed by this Court is not based on
Hence, the instant petition. a stipulation of facts. The issue of whether or not the appellant is
Petitioner alleges that the respondent Court of Appeals erred: psychologically incapacitated to discharge a basic marital obligation was
I resolved upon a review of both the documentary and testimonial evidence on
in affirming the conclusions of the lower court that there was no sexual record. Appellant admitted that he did not have sexual relations with his wife
intercourse between the parties without making any findings of fact. after almost ten months of cohabitation, and it appears that he is not suffering
II from any physical disability. Such abnormal reluctance or unwillingness to
in holding that the refusal of private respondent to have sexual communion with consummate his marriage is strongly indicative of a serious personality disorder
petitioner is a psychological incapacity inasmuch as proof thereof is totally which to the mind of this Court clearly demonstrates an 'utter insensitivity or
absent. inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage' within the meaning of
III Article 36 of the Family Code (See Santos vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
in holding that the alleged refusal of both the petitioner and the private 112019, January 4, 1995).4
respondent to have sex with each other constitutes psychological incapacity of Petitioner further contends that respondent court erred in holding that the alleged refusal
both. of both the petitioner and the private respondent to have sex with each other constitutes
IV psychological incapacity of both. He points out as error the failure of the trial court to
in affirming the annulment of the marriage between the parties decreed by the make "a categorical finding about the alleged psychological incapacity and an in-depth
lower court without fully satisfying itself that there was no collusion between analysis of the reasons for such refusal which may not be necessarily due to
them. physchological disorders" because there might have been other reasons, — i.e., physical
 17

disorders, such as aches, pains or other discomforts, — why private respondent would husband is reluctant or unwilling to perform the sexual act with his wife whom
not want to have sexual intercourse from May 22, 1988 to March 15, 1989, in a short he professes to love very dearly, and who has not posed any insurmountable
span of 10 months. resistance to his alleged approaches, is indicative of a hopeless situation, and
First, it must be stated that neither the trial court nor the respondent court made a finding of a serious personality disorder that constitutes psychological incapacity to
on who between petitioner and private respondent refuses to have sexual contact with discharge the basic marital covenants within the contemplation of the Family
the other. The fact remains, however, that there has never been coitus between them. At Code.7
any rate, since the action to declare the marriage void may be filed by either party, i.e., While the law provides that the husband and the wife are obliged to live together,
even the psychologically incapacitated, the question of who refuses to have sex with the observe mutual love, respect and fidelity (Art. 68, Family Code), the sanction therefor is
other becomes immaterial. actually the "spontaneous, mutual affection between husband and wife and not any legal
Petitioner claims that there is no independent evidence on record to show that any of the mandate or court order" (Cuaderno vs. Cuaderno 120 Phil. 1298). Love is useless unless
parties is suffering from phychological incapacity. Petitioner also claims that he wanted to it is shared with another. Indeed, no man is an island, the cruelest act of a partner in
have sex with private respondent; that the reason for private respondent's refusal may marriage is to say "I could not have cared less." This is so because an ungiven self is an
not be psychological but physical disorder as stated above. unfulfilled self. The egoist has nothing but himself. In the natural order, it is sexual
We do not agree. Assuming it to be so, petitioner could have discussed with private intimacy which brings spouses wholeness and oneness. Sexual intimacy is a gift and a
respondent or asked her what is ailing her, and why she balks and avoids him everytime participation in the mystery of creation. It is a function which enlivens the hope of
he wanted to have sexual intercourse with her. He never did. At least, there is nothing in procreation and ensures the continuation of family relations.
the record to show that he had tried to find out or discover what the problem with his wife It appears that there is absence of empathy between petitioner and private respondent.
could be. What he presented in evidence is his doctor's Medical Report that there is no That is — a shared feeling which between husband and wife must be experienced not
evidence of his impotency and he is capable of erection. 5 Since it is petitioner's claim that only by having spontaneous sexual intimacy but a deep sense of spiritual communion.
the reason is not psychological but perhaps physical disorder on the part of private Marital union is a two-way process. An expressive interest in each other's feelings at a
respondent, it became incumbent upon him to prove such a claim. time it is needed by the other can go a long way in deepening the marital relationship.
If a spouse, although physically capable but simply refuses to perform his or her Marriage is definitely not for children but for two consenting adults who view the
essential marriage obligations, and the refusal is senseless and constant, relationship with love amor gignit amorem, respect, sacrifice and a continuing
Catholic marriage tribunals attribute the causes to psychological incapacity than commitment to compromise, conscious of its value as a sublime social institution.
to stubborn refusal. Senseless and protracted refusal is equivalent to This Court, finding the gravity of the failed relationship in which the parties found
psychological incapacity. Thus, the prolonged refusal of a spouse to have themselves trapped in its mire of unfulfilled vows and unconsummated marital
sexual intercourse with his or her spouse is considered a sign of psychological obligations, can do no less but sustain the studied judgment of respondent appellate
incapacity.6 court.
Evidently, one of the essential marital obligations under the Family Code is "To procreate IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING PREMISES , the assailed decision of the Court of
children based on the universal principle that procreation of children through sexual Appeals dated November 29, 1994 is hereby AFFIRMED in all respects and the petition
cooperation is the basic end of marriage." Constant non- fulfillment of this obligation will is hereby DENIED for lack of merit.
finally destroy the integrity or wholeness of the marriage. In the case at bar, the SO ORDERED.
senseless and protracted refusal of one of the parties to fulfill the above marital obligation Regalado, Romero, Puno and Mendoza, JJ., concur.
is equivalent to psychological incapacity.
As aptly stated by the respondent court,
An examination of the evidence convinces Us that the husband's plea that the
wife did not want carnal intercourse with him does not inspire belief. Since he G.R. No. L-12790 August 31, 1960
was not physically impotent, but he refrained from sexual intercourse during the JOEL JIMENEZ, plaintiff-appellee,
entire time (from May 22, 1988 to March 15, 1989) that he occupied the same vs.
bed with his wife, purely out of symphaty for her feelings, he deserves to be REMEDIOS CAÑIZARES, defendant.
doubted for not having asserted his right seven though she balked (Tompkins Republic of the Philippines, intervenor-appellant.
vs. Tompkins, 111 Atl. 599, cited in I Paras, Civil Code, at p. 330). Besides, if it Acting Solicitor General Guillermo E. Torres and Solicitor Pacifico P. de Castro for
were true that it is the wife was suffering from incapacity, the fact that defendant appellant.
did not go to court and seek the declaration of nullity weakens his claim. This Climaco, Ascarraga and Silang for appellee.
case was instituted by the wife whose normal expectations of her marriage were PADILLA, J.:
frustrated by her husband's inadequacy. Considering the innate modesty of the In a complaint filed on 7 June 1955 in the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga the
Filipino woman, it is hard to believe that she would expose her private life to plaintiff Joel Jimenez prays for a decree annulling his marriage to the defendant
public scrutiny and fabricate testimony against her husband if it were not Remedios Cañizares contracted on 3 August 1950 before a judge of the municipal court
necessary to put her life in order and put to rest her marital status. of Zamboanga City, upon the ground that the office of her genitals or vagina was to small
We are not impressed by defendant's claim that what the evidence proved is the to allow the penetration of a male organ or penis for copulation; that the condition of her
unwillingness or lack of intention to perform the sexual act, which is not genitals as described above existed at the time of marriage and continues to exist; and
phychological incapacity, and which can be achieved "through proper that for that reason he left the conjugal home two nights and one day after they had been
motivation." After almost ten months of cohabitation, the admission that the married. On 14 June 1955 the wife was summoned and served a copy of the complaint.
 18

She did not file an answer. On 29 September 1956, pursuant to the provisions of article Marriage in this country is an institution in which the community is deeply interested. The
88 of the Civil Code, the Court directed the city attorney of Zamboanga to inquire state has surrounded it with safeguards to maintain its purity, continuity and permanence.
whether there was a collusion, to intervene for the State to see that the evidence for the The security and stability of the state are largely dependent upon it. It is the interest of
plaintiff is not a frame-up, concocted or fabricated. On 17 December 1956 the Court each and every member of the community to prevent the bringing about of a condition
entered an order requiring the defendant to submit to a physical examination by a that would shake its foundation and ultimately lead to its destruction. The incidents of the
competent lady physician to determine her physical capacity for copulation and to submit, status are governed by law, not by will of the parties. The law specifically enumerates the
within ten days from receipt of the order, a medical certificate on the result thereof. On 14 legal grounds, that must be proved to exist by indubitable evidence, to annul a marriage.
March 1957 the defendant was granted additional five days from notice to comply with In the case at bar, the annulment of the marriage in question was decreed upon the sole
the order of 17 December 1956 with warning that her failure to undergo medical testimony of the husband who was expected to give testimony tending or aiming at
examination and submit the required doctor's certificate would be deemed lack of interest securing the annulment of his marriage he sought and seeks. Whether the wife is really
on her part in the case and that judgment upon the evidence presented by her husband impotent cannot be deemed to have been satisfactorily established, becase from the
would be rendered. commencement of the proceedings until the entry of the decree she had abstained from
After hearing, at which the defendant was not present, on 11 April 1957 the Court taking part therein. Although her refusal to be examined or failure to appear in court show
entered a decree annulling the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant. On 26 indifference on her part, yet from such attitude the presumption arising out of the
April 1957 the city attorney filed a motion for reconsideration of the decree thus entered, suppression of evidence could not arise or be inferred because women of this country
upon the ground, among others, that the defendant's impotency has not been are by nature coy, bashful and shy and would not submit to a physical examination
satisfactorily established as required by law; that she had not been physically examined unless compelled to by competent authority. This the Court may do without doing
because she had refused to be examined; that instead of annulling the marriage the violence to and infringing in this case is not self-incrimination. She is not charged with
Court should have punished her for contempt of court and compelled her to undergo a any offense. She is not being compelled to be a witness against herself.1 "Impotency
physical examination and submit a medical certificate; and that the decree sought to be being an abnormal condition should not be presumed. The presumption is in favor of
reconsidered would open the door to married couples, who want to end their marriage to potency."2 The lone testimony of the husband that his wife is physically incapable of
collude or connive with each other by just alleging impotency of one of them. He prayed sexual intercourse is insufficient to tear asunder the ties that have bound them together
that the complaint be dismissed or that the wife be subjected to a physical examination. as husband and wife.
Pending resolution of his motion, the city attorney timely appealed from the decree. On The decree appealed from is set aside and the case remanded to the lower court for
13 May 1957 the motion for reconsideration was denied. further proceedings in accordance with this decision, without pronouncement as to costs.
The question to determine is whether the marriage in question may be annulled on the Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera,
strength only of the lone testimony of the husband who claimed and testified that his wife Gutierrez David, and Dizon, JJ. concur.
was and is impotent. The latter did not answer the complaint, was absent during the
hearing, and refused to submit to a medical examination.
19