G.R. No. 238798, March 14, 2023
CICL XXX, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

In 2003, the accused, 17-year-old CICL XXX, went to the house of the victim, AAA, mauled him, struck his eye, and left him bleeding. The victim revealed that CICL XXX inflicted the injuries. The victim suffered massive cerebral contusions, was bedridden for five years, and died in 2008. CICL XXX was charged with Homicide before the RTC. While the case was pending, Republic Act No. 9344 (the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act) took effect in June 2006. In 2014, the RTC found CICL XXX guilty of Homicide. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but reduced the penalty, appreciating the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority. CICL XXX elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a Rule 45 petition, insisting on his innocence. The ponencia affirms the guilty verdict, finding that CICL XXX acted with discernment.

ISSUE

Whether CICL XXX, a minor above fifteen but below eighteen years of age at the time of the crime, acted with discernment and is thus not exempt from criminal liability under R.A. No. 9344.

RULING

Yes, CICL XXX acted with discernment. The concurring opinion of Chief Justice Gesmundo emphasizes that the totality of factual circumstances reveals CICL XXX knew the gravity and consequences of his actions. Discernment pertains to the capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong and the consequences of the wrongful act. Proof of discernment need not be direct evidence alone; it may be shown by circumstantial evidence. In this case, several circumstances taken together sufficiently show discernment: (1) Prospectant (before the act): CICL XXX harbored a grudge because the victim testified against him in another case; the assault was planned retaliation; he invited a companion and executed the crime stealthily at the victim’s house during off-hours. (2) Concomitant (during the act): He attacked the victim at around 3:00 a.m. when the victim was unguarded; the force exerted was severe, causing bleeding and massive cerebral contusions. (3) Retrospectant (after the act): After committing the crime, he quit school and fled to Sagada, indicating he knew his actions were wrong and he would face consequences. These circumstances demonstrate CICL XXX’s cunning, awareness, and acceptance of the consequences of his wrongful actions. Therefore, his conviction for Homicide is affirmed.