Chavez vs. CA
Chavez vs. CA
Chavez vs. CA
664
665
SEPARATE OPINION:
666
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
667
SANCHEZ, J.:
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
668
2
"Lory" Meneses, Peter Doe, Charlie Doe and Paul Doe.
Averred in the aforesaid information was that on or
about the 14th day of November, 1962, in Quezon City, the
accused conspired, with intent of gain, abuse of confidence
and without the consent of the owner thereof, Dy Sun Hiok
y Lim, in asporting the motor vehicle abovedescribed.
Upon arraignment, all the accused, except the three
Does who have not been identified nor apprehended,
pleaded not guilty.
On July 23, 1963, trial commenced before the judge
presiding Branch IX of the Court of First Instance of Rizal
in Quezon City.
The trial opened with the following dialogue, which for
the great bearing it has on this case, is here reproduced:
"COURT:
The parties may proceed.
FISCAL GRECIA:
Our first witness is Roger Chavez [one of the accused].
ATTY. CARBON [Counsel for petitioner Chavez]:
I am quite taken by surprise, as counsel for the accused
Roger Chavez, with this move of the Fiscal in presenting
him as his witness. / object.
COURT:
On what ground, counsel?
ATTY. CARBON:
On the ground that I have to confer with my client. It is
really surprising that at this stage, without my being
notified by the Fiscal, my client is being presented as
witness for the prosecution. I want to say in passing that
it is only at this very moment that I come to know about
this strategy of the prosecution.
COURT (To the Fiscal) :
You are not withdrawing the information against the
accused Roger Chavez by making [him a] state witness?
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
_______________
669
FISCAL GRECIA:
I am not making him as state witness, Your Honor.
I am only presenting him as an ordinary witness.
ATTY. CARBON:
As a matter of right, because it will incriminate my client,
I object.
COURT:
The Court will give counsel for Roger Chavez fifteen
minutes within which to confer and explain to his client
about the giving of his testimony.
xxx
COURT: [after the recess]
Are the parties ready?
FISCAL:
We are ready to call on our first witness, Rogcr Chavez.
ATTY. CARBON:
As per understanding, the proceeding was suspended in
order to enable me to confer with my client.
I conferred with my client and he assured me that he will
not testify for the prosecution this morning after I have
explained to him the consequences of what will transpire.
COURT:
What he will testify to does not necessarily incriminate
him, counsel.
And there is the right of the prosecution to ask anybody to
act as witness on the witness-stand including the accused.
If there should be any question that is incriminating
then that is the time for counsel to interpose his
objection and the court will sustain him if and when the
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
670
671
COURT:
3
The Fiscal may proceed."
Chavez asked Lee whether his car was for sale. Lee
answered affirmatively and left his address with Chavez.
Then, on November 12, Chavez met Sumilang at a
barbershop, informed him about the Thunderbird. But
Sumilang said that he had changed his mind about buying
a new car. Instead, he told Cliavez that he wanted to
mortgage his Buick car for P10,000.00 to cover an
indebtedness in Pasay City. Upon the suggestion of
Chavez, they went to see Luis Asistio, who he knew was
tending money on car mortgages and who, on one occasion,
already lent Romeo Vasquez F3,000.00 on the same Biiick
car. Asistio however told the two that he had a better idea
on how to raise the money. His plan was to capitalize on
Romeo Vasquez' reputation as a wealthy movie star,
introduce him as a buyer to someone who was selling a car
and, after the deed of sale is signed, by trickery to run
away with the car. Asistio would then register it, sell it to a
third person for a profit. Chavez, known to be a car agent,
was included in the plan. He furnished the name of
Johnson Lee who was selling his Thunderbird.
In the morning of November 14, Chavez telephoned
Johnson Lee and arranged for an appointment. Sometime
in the afternoon, Chavez and Sumilang met Lee in his
Thunderbird on Highway 54. Sumilang was introduced as
the interested buyer. Sumilang's driver inspected the car,
took the wheel for a while. After Sumilang and Lee agreed
on the purchase price (P21.000.00), they went to Binondo to
Johnson Lee's cousin, Dy Sun Hiok, in whose name
_______________
672
_______________
673
"It is not improbable that true to the saying that misery loves
company Roger Chavez tried to drag his co-accused down with
him by coloring his story with fabrications which he expected
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
The sum of all these is that the trial court freed all the
accused except Roger Chavez who was found guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified theft. He was
accordingly sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of
not less than ten(10) years, one (1) day, as minimum and
not more than fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one
(1) day as maximum, to indemnify Dy Sun Hiok and/or
Johnson Lee in the sum of P21,000.00 without subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, to undergo the
accessory penalties prescribed by law, and to pay the costs.
The Thunberbird car then in the custody of the NBI was
ordered to be turned over to Ricardo Sumilang, who was
directed to return to Asistio the sum of Pl,000.00 unless the
latter chose to pay F21,500.00, representing the balance of
the contract price for the car.
The foregoing sentence was promulgated on March 8,
_______________
676
_______________
8 Petitioner here submits the theory that the facts found by the trial
court make out a case of estafa, not qualified
677
_______________
678
_______________
679
_______________
17 See also: III Martin, p. 262; Tanada and Carreon, op. cit., pp. 278-
279.
18 State vs. Wolfe, 266 N.W. 116, 125:104 ALR 464, 476: Anno., p. 479.
680
_______________
681
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
sustain him if and when the court feels that the answer of this
witness to the question would incriminate him.
Counsel has all the assurance that the court will not require
the witness to answer questions which would incriminate him.
But surely, counsel could not object to have the accused called
on the witness-stand."
_______________
682
_______________
684
35
tack, which precisely is the function of habeas corpus This
writ may issue even if another remedy 36which is less
effective may be availed of by the defendant.: Thus, failure
by the accused to perfect his appeal before the37 Court of
Appeals does not preclude a recourse to the writ. The writ
38
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 22/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
38
may be granted upon a judgment 39
already final. For, as
explained in Johnson vs. Zerbst, the writ of habeas corpus
as an extraordinary remedy must be liberally given effect™
so as to protect well a person whose liberty is at stake. The
propriety of the writ was given the nod in that case,
involving a violation of another constitutional right, in this
wise:
_______________
35 Abriol vs. Homeres, 84 Phil. 525, 530, 534. See the dissenting opinion
affirming the same view at pp. 538-539. Sec also: Camasura vs. Provost Marshall,
supra, at p. 137.
36 25 Am. Jur., p. 155.
37 39 C.J.S. p. 446, citing Johnson vs. Zerbst, supra.
38 Abriol vs. Homeres, supra, at pp. 527, 534-535.
39 Supra, at p. 1467: "True, habeas corpus cannot be used as a means of
reviewing errors of law and irregularities—not involving the question of
jurisdiction—occurring during the course of trial: and the 'writ of habeas corpus
cannot be used as a writ of error.' These principles, however, must be construed
and applied so as to preserve—not destroy—constitutional safeguards of human
life and liberty."
40 III Mavtin. p. 267: The prohibition against self-incrimi-nation, in order that it
may produce its desired purpose and may not be rendered a dead Mter, should be
interpreted liberally in avor of the person invoking the same." Scc: Bermudez vs.
Castillo, supra, at p. 489.
685
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 23/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
_______________
686
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 24/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
Petition granted.
SEPARATE OPINION
CASTRO, J.:
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 25/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
687
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 26/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
688
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 27/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
689
11
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself" may,
on occasion, save a guilty man from his just deserts, but it
is aimed against a more far-reaching evil—recurrence of
the Inquisition and the Star Chamber, even if not in their
stark brutality. Prevention of the greater evil was deemed
12
of more importance than occurrence of the lesser evil. As
Dean Griswold put the matter with eloquence:
"Roger Chavez does not offer any defense. As a matter of fact, his
testimony as a witness for the prosecution establishes his guilt
beyond reasonable doubt."
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 28/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
_______________
690
_______________
15 Resolutions of May 14, 1968 and June 21, 1968, CA-G.R. 06776-CR.
16 Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963).
17 Id. For an account of a convict who served twenty-two years in prison
before finally being released on habeas corpus on a finding that he was
denied due process, see Marino v. Ragen, 332 U.S. 651 (1947).
691
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 30/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
xx xx xx
xx xx xx
xx xx xx
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 31/32
11/28/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 024
"In short, the liberties of none are safe unless the liberties of
all are protected.
"But even if we should sense no danger to our own liberties,
even if we feel secure because we belong to a group that is
important and respected, we must recognize that our Bill of
Eights is a code of fair play for the less 19fortunate that we in all
honor and good conscience must observe."
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016eafda3f9b82eb5306003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 32/32