Number 29 and 36 (Article 16 and Article 20)

People v. Ruby Mariano

G.R. No. 134847

December 6, 2000

Facts:

Michelle Priol (“Michelle”), 16 years old, work as domestic helper at the household of the sisters Ruth
Mariano (“Ruth”) and Ruby Mariano (“Ruby”) in Bambang, Pasig City.

Jenny Priol (“Jenny”), Michelle’s older sister, visited Michelle at Mariano Residence. She noticed that
whenever she would visit Michelle, she and her sister could not freely talk as Ruth and Ruby were
always hovering about. Consequently, Jenny never went to her sister again.

Afterwards, Ruth and Ruby brought Michelle to Jenny to complain to her that their rice cooker no longer
functioned and heaped the blame on Michelle. During that time, Jenny noticed that Michelle’s hair was
unevenly cut to the scalp. Then, Jenny told Ruby that she was going to take Michelle back from them,
but Ruby hurriedly left with Ruth taking Michelle with them.

At around 6:00 in the evening, SPO2 Hernandez received an anonymous call reporting that a woman
was seen in Bambang, Pasig City, carrying a rectangular box with human leg protruding, and placed the
box inside the compartment of a car bearing plate no. UPR-561. Based on the information, SPO2
Hernandez along with SPO1 Fidelino immediately conducted a “stake-out and surveillance operation” in
the said place. After a couple of minutes, SPO2 Hernandez and SPO1 Fidelino saw the vehicle bearing
with the reported plate number, then they followed the vehicle. Thereafter, the SPO2 Hernandez and
SPO1 Fidelino overtook the suspects’ vehicle and blocked its path. The two were conducted a visual
search of the luggage compartment of the vehicle. Initially, Ruby refused saying that only dirty clothes
were in the compartment but later relented the police officers insisted. Upon opening the
compartment, SPO2 Hernandez was greeted by putrid odor emanating from decomposing body inside
the box. Ruth and Ruby identified the body as that of their maid Michelle. Consequently, Ruth and Ruby
were arrested.

Based on autopsy report, the cause of death of the victim Michelle was multiple traumatic injuries and
scalding burns, 1st and 2nd degrees, 72% of the body surface area. With the foregoing findings, Ruth and
Ruby were charged with murder. Ruth denied the charge claiming that the victim died because she got
sick, and not because I mauled her. Ruby confessed that she doused boiling water on Michelle’s face for
six times on different occasion and pulled Michelle’s hair and banged her head on the wall. On August
17, 1997, when she was about to wake up Michelle, she discovered Michelle’s body already bent and
flexed forward lying in bed and lifeless. So, she hurriedly placed the victim’s body in a box, which she
then loaded inside the luggage compartment of Ruby’s car. When Ruby was arrived, Ruby met Ruth at
the gate of their house. Ruth told Ruby that she had a problem and then asked her to drive and
promised to tell her problem about it on the way.

RTC – Ruth and Ruby were convicted of murder by the trial court. Ruth was sentenced to death while
Ruby was found guilty as an accomplice and sentenced to reclusion temporal.
Hence, SC automatically reviewed the death penalty imposed by the RTC

Issue:

1. W/N Ruth, as principal, was guilty of murder.

2. W/N Ruby was an accomplice or accessory to the crime of murder.

Held:

1. Yes. Ruth was guilty of murder, qualified by Cruelty and aggravated by abuse of superior strength as
principal. It is evident that the death of the victim was the direct, natural, and logical consequence of
the injuries she sustained in the hands of Ruth.

CRUELTY

The test in appreciating cruelty, as a qualifying circumstance of murder, is whether the accused
deliberately augmented the wrong by causing another wrong not necessary for its commission, or
inhumanly increased the victim’s sufferings or outrage, or scoffed, at his person or corpse.

Based on the evidence presented, the wounds and scalding burns were inflicted at different times but
did not immediately result in death, as some of the wounds were still in the process of healing at the
time of autopsy. This clearly suggests that the victim was still alive even after those injuries were
sadistically and inhumanly inflicted on her.

ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH

The circumstance of abuse of superior strength aggravated the killing of the victim. Abuse of superior
strength depends upon the age, size, and strength of the parties. To take advantage of superior strength
is to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person
attacked.

Based on the evidence presented, there was gross physical disparity between the age, built, and
strength of Ruth vis-à-vis victim Michelle. The former is big and burly matured woman in her thirties,
several inches taller than the victim, and who could subdue the victim even without a weapon. While
the latter was merely a teenager, five feet tall, slim, and poorly nourished and weighed less than 100
pounds.

Hence, the presence of the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength warrants the
imposition of the higher penalty of death on Ruth, in accordance with Art 63 of RPC.

2. No. Ruby was neither an accomplice nor accessory to the crime of murder.

ACCOMPLICE

There is no solid evidence on record effectively linking Ruby to the gruesome killing of Michelle. There is
no showing that she ever laid hands on the deceased nor was she ever seen helping her sister Ruth on
those occasions when Ruth brutally manhandled Michelle, nor was there any positive act of assent or
cooperation on her part with Ruth ever satisfactorily established or proved by prosecution.

ACCESSORY
Ruby is the sister of Ruth. As such, their relationship exempts Ruby from criminal liability under Art. 20
of RPC. The reason for exemption in Article 20 because of the ties of blood and the preservation of the
cleanliness of one’s name, which compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives. Thus, SC is
mandated by law to acquit Ruby.

Dispositive Portion

WHEREFORE, the Decision of the court a quo of 22 June 1998 is MODIFIED. Accused-appellant Ruth
Mariano is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER qualified by extreme cruelty
and is sentenced to DEATH. She is further ORDERED to pay the heirs of victim Michelle Priol y Beronio
the following amounts: P50,000.00 for civil indemnity, P35,000.00 for actual damages, P300,000.00 for
moral damages, another P50,000.00 for exemplary damages, and to pay the costs.

As for accused-appellant Ruby Mariano, the Court finds the evidence insufficient to establish beyond
reasonable doubt her guilt as an accomplice in the commission of the said crime. Neither can she be
held liable as an accessory after the fact, as she is exempt from criminal liability by reason of her
relationship with her co-accused pursuant to Art. 20 of The Revised Penal Code. Consequently, she is
ACQUITTED of the crime charged and her immediate release from custody is ordered unless she is being
detained for some other lawful cause. The Director of Prisons is DIRECTED to report to this Court the
action taken hereon within five (5) days from receipt hereof.