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 traveling at a fast speed. An 81-year-old woman, Rita B. Cabrera, began crossing the street as the first rig approached. Genobiagon’s vehicle struck Cabrera, causing her to fall unconscious in the middle of the road. Genobiagon initially continued driving but was pursued and stopped by a bystander, Vicente Mangyao. When confronted, Genobiagon claimed, “it was the old woman that bumped him.” The victim was taken to the hospital where she died three hours later from her injuries.
The Court of First Instance of Cebu found Genobiagon guilty of homicide through reckless imprudence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but increased the civil indemnity to the heirs from P6,000 to P12,000. Genobiagon filed a petition for review before the Supreme Court, 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 primary issue is whether the factual findings of the lower courts, which established petitioner’s criminal negligence as the proximate cause of the victim’s death, are binding on the Supreme Court. Subsidiary issues concern the legal effect of alleged contributory negligence and the propriety of the awarded civil indemnity.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The Court emphasized that factual findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeals are conclusive and binding on review, absent any showing of grave abuse of discretion. The established facts—driving at high speed on a downgrade while attempting to overtake—constituted reckless imprudence sufficient to sustain criminal liability.
On the defense of contributory negligence, the Court ruled it is not a valid defense in criminal cases involving reckless imprudence. One cannot invoke another’s negligence to escape the consequences of one’s own criminal negligence. The petitioner’s own reckless driving was the proximate and efficient cause of the accident and the resulting death. Finally, the Court found the increase in civil liability proper. Modifying the appellate court’s award, the Supreme Court raised the civil indemnity for death to P30,000.00, conforming to prevailing jurisprudence at the time. The decision was affirmed with this modification.