GR 40452; (October, 1989) (Digest)
G.R. No. 40452 October 12, 1989
GREGORIO GENOBIAGON, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
On December 31, 1959, in Cebu City, petitioner Gregorio Genobiagon was driving his rig down a steep grade on T. Padilla Street. He was following another rig at a distance of two meters and was attempting to overtake it. While driving at a fast speed, his vehicle struck 81-year-old Rita B. Cabrera, who was crossing the street. The impact caused the victim to fall unconscious onto the road, with her belongings scattered. A bystander, Vicente Mangyao, witnessed the incident and shouted for Genobiagon to stop. When the petitioner initially continued driving, Mangyao gave chase and overtook him. Genobiagon returned to the scene, and the victim was taken to a hospital where she died three hours later from her injuries.
The petitioner was charged with Homicide through Reckless Imprudence. The trial court convicted him, imposing a prison sentence and ordering him to indemnify the victim’s heirs in the amount of P6,000. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but increased the civil indemnity to P12,000. Genobiagon then filed this petition for review, arguing that the victim’s own negligence was the proximate cause of the accident, that he should be acquitted on reasonable doubt, and that the increase in civil liability was unjust.
ISSUE
The core issues are whether the factual findings of the lower courts are binding, whether the victim’s alleged contributory negligence exonerates the petitioner, and whether the civil indemnity was correctly adjudged.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The Court emphasized that the findings of fact by the trial court and the Court of Appeals are conclusive and binding on review, as all the issues raised by the petitioner were factual in nature. On the substantive defense, the Court ruled that contributory negligence of the victim is not a defense in criminal cases for reckless imprudence. One cannot invoke another’s negligence to escape the consequences of one’s own criminal negligence. The petitioner’s own reckless act of driving too fast on a downgrade while attempting to overtake another vehicle was the proximate cause of the accident and the resulting death.
Regarding civil liability, the Court found the petitioner’s objection to the increased indemnity meritless. It modified the appellate court’s decision further by raising the civil indemnity to P30,000, in accordance with the prevailing jurisprudence at the time for death indemnity in homicide cases. The penalty imposed by the lower courts was sustained. The decision was affirmed with the sole modification of increasing the civil indemnity to P30,000.