GR 126116; (June, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 126116 June 21, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ERLINDO YAM-ID alias “ELY,” accused-appellant.
FACTS
On April 1, 1994, accused-appellant Erlindo Yam-id, without provocation, attacked six-year-old Jerry Tejamo and his cousin, Julius Cantutay, as they passed by his house. Yam-id chased the children, overtook Jerry, and killed him by stabbing and hacking him. He then knelt over the body and sucked blood from the victim’s neck. Julius escaped and alerted Jerry’s father, Danilo Tejamo. When Danilo and his wife approached, Yam-id declared, “I will kill all of you,” and attacked Danilo with a bolo, inflicting wounds on his nose and head before accidentally wounding himself and fleeing. The trial court convicted Yam-id of murder for Jerry’s death and frustrated homicide for the attack on Danilo, imposing the death penalty for murder.
During trial, Yam-id denied killing Jerry and claimed self-defense against Danilo. On automatic review before the Supreme Court, he changed his defense, admitting the killing but pleading insanity. He also argued that for the attack on Danilo, the prosecution failed to prove intent to kill, warranting a lesser conviction.
ISSUE
The issues are: (1) whether the defense of insanity can be raised for the first time on appeal; (2) whether the killing of Jerry Tejamo was attended by treachery; and (3) whether the crime against Danilo Tejamo is frustrated or attempted homicide.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. First, it held that an appeal in a criminal case opens the entire case for review, allowing consideration of new defenses like insanity, especially in a death penalty case. However, the Court found the insanity plea unsubstantiated, as Yam-id failed to prove he was completely deprived of intelligence or freedom of will at the time of the crime. The killing of Jerry was qualified by treachery, as the sudden and unexpected attack on a defenseless child ensured the execution without risk to Yam-id. With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty for murder was reduced from death to reclusion perpetua.
Regarding the attack on Danilo, the Court ruled it constituted only attempted homicide, not frustrated homicide. The prosecution failed to prove that the wounds inflicted were fatal or that the crime would have resulted in death without timely medical intervention. Applying the Revised Penal Code, the penalty was reduced to an indeterminate sentence of two months and one day of arresto mayor, as minimum, to two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional, as maximum.