SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 236175. March 5, 2018.]

ELIZABETH DAVID y LOZADA , petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES , respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 05
March 2018 which reads as follows: TIADCc

"G.R. No. 236175 (Elizabeth David y Lozada vs. People of the

Philippines) . — This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari 1 under Rule 45 of the Rules
of Court assailing the Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) dated August 31, 2017, in
CA-G.R. CR No. 39232 which a rmed in toto the Decision 3 dated July 5, 2016 of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 95, in Criminal Case No. R-QZN-15-
10207-CR, nding petitioner Elizabeth David y Lozada (Elizabeth) guilty of Malicious
Mischief as de ned and penalized by Articles 327 and 329 of the Revised Penal Code
(RPC).

The Facts

Sometime in June 17, 2012, private complainant Mailene A. Caparroso (Mailene)

was xing things inside her house. She was alarmed by a ticking sound on the cement
below her window and upon checking, she saw two men hammering the cement of the
septic tank (posonegro) which Elizabeth and her husband Amor David (Amor)
constructed thereon. 4
Mailene decided to video the hammering. Thereafter, Elizabeth started hurling
stones at the windows. Amor likewise hurled a bottle of beer shattering the windows of
Mailene's house. Glass from the shattered windows and the bottle of beer hit her face
and body. 5
Mailene thereafter sought medical attention and reported the matter to the
police. 6
Elizabeth's version of the story was that it was Mailene who started cursing and
throwing objects at them and they only acted in retaliation. 7
A case for Malicious Mischief was led by Mailene against Elizabeth. After trial,
the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) rendered its Decision 8 dated May 6, 2015 nding
Elizabeth guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentencing her to a penalty of two (2)
months and one (1) day to six (6) months imprisonment and actual damages in the
amount of Php4,000.00, viz.:
Wherefore, premises considered, nding the accused Elizabeth David y
Lozada guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Malicious Mischief, she
is hereby sentenced to suffer a penalty of Two (2) Months and One (1) Day to
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Six (6) Months imprisonment and to pay [Mailene] the amount of Php4,000.00
for actual damages.
No pronouncement as to cost.
SO ORDERED. 9
On appeal to the RTC, the decision was modi ed to include the award of moral
and exemplary damages, viz.: 1 0
WHEREFORE , the Court renders its decision as follows:
1. The appeal interposed by the accused-appellant is dismissed; and
2. The appeal by the private complainant is partly granted. The
decision dated May 6, 2015 of the [MeTC], Branch 37, Quezon City is modi ed
to include the award of moral and exemplary damages to the private
complainant. This court a rms the award of actual damages in the amount of
FOUR THOUSAND PESOS (P4,000.00), and further awards moral damages in
favor of [Mailene] in the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (Php30,000.00); and
exemplary damages in the amount of Twenty Thousand Pesos (Php20,000). SDAaTC

SO ORDERED. 11

Elizabeth led a Motion for Reconsideration but it was denied. She thereafter
interposed an appeal with the CA.
In a Decision 1 2 dated August 31, 2017, the CA affirmed the ruling of the RTC. The
dispositive portion reads as follows:
WHEREFORE , in light of the foregoing, the petition for review is
DENIED . The assailed Decision dated 5 July 2016 of the [RTC] of Quezon City,
Branch 95, in Criminal Case No. R-QZN-15-10207-CR is hereby AFFIRMED .
SO ORDERED. 13

Hence, the present petition.

The Issue

Whether or not there was absence of actual appellate review thus rendering the
CA's decision void and entitles Elizabeth to a judgment of acquittal.

Ruling of the Court

It is well entrenched in this jurisdiction that factual ndings of the trial court on
the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are entitled to the highest respect and
will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any clear showing that it overlooked,
misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight and substance
that would have affected the result of the case. This doctrine is premised on the
undisputed fact that, since the trial court had the best opportunity to observe the
demeanor of the witnesses while on the stand, it was in a position to discern whether or
not they were telling the truth. 1 4
In sum, majority of the issues raised by Elizabeth would require the Court to delve
into factual matters which have already been decided by the lower courts and adopted
by the appellate court. The trial court and the appellate court both a rmed the factual
ndings of the MeTC and ruled that the evidence on record have established all the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 elements of Malicious Mischief.
Article 327 of the RPC reads:
ART. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. — Any person who
shall deliberately cause to the property of another any damage not falling within
the terms of the next preceding chapter, shall be guilty of malicious mischief.
The elements 1 5 of Malicious Mischief as de ned by the RPC have been duly
proven in this case, viz.:
1. Elizabeth deliberately caused damage to the property of another when she
threw stones at the windows;
2. Such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction;
and
3. That the act of damaging another's property was committed merely for
the sake of damaging it.
The identity of petitioner and the acts constituting malicious mischief have
already been established. Elizabeth claims that absent a showing of "intent" on her part,
the crime of malicious mischief cannot be committed. To the Court's mind, this is
nothing but a futile and desperate attempt to escape the consequences of her action. It
has been likewise established that Elizabeth and her husband wilfully and deliberately
hurled stones and a beer bottle at Mailene's house. Thus, there is no iota of doubt that
Elizabeth's guilt has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. acEHCD

However, as regards the penalty originally imposed by the MeTC and a rmed,
albeit modi ed, by the RTC and further a rmed by the CA in the presently assailed
decision, the Court nds that modi cation is in order. In view of the adjustments stated
in Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10951, 1 6 speci cally Section 88 thereof, the penalty imposed
on persons found liable for Malicious Mischief under Article 327 and penalized under
Article 329 is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 88. Article 329 of the same Act, as amended by
Commonwealth Act No. 3999, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Art. 329. Other mischiefs. — The mischiefs not included in the next
preceding article shall be punished:
"1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if
the value of the damage caused exceeds Two hundred thousand
pesos (P200,000);
"2. B y arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if
such value is over Forty thousand pesos (P40,000) but does not
exceed Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000); and
"3. B y arresto menor or a ne of not less than the
value of the damage caused and not more than Forty
thousand pesos (P40,000), if the amount involved does
not exceed Forty thousand pesos (P40,000) or cannot be
estimated." (Emphasis and underlining Ours)
The value of the damage caused by Elizabeth is only Four Thousand Pesos
(Php4,000.00), punishable by arresto menor (imprisonment of one [1] to thirty [30]
days) or a ne not less than the value of the damage caused and in no case to exceed
Forty Thousand Pesos (Php40,000.00). Considering the use of the conjunction "or"
instead of "and," the penalties of imprisonment and ne are alternative in case of
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 malicious mischief falling under paragraph 3 of Article 329 where the value of the
damage caused does not exceed Php40,000.00.
Pursuant to the adjustment provided in R.A. No. 10951, the original sentence of
two (2) months and one (1) day to six (6) months imprisonment should be reduced to
arresto menor or imprisonment of one (1) to thirty (30) days.
Anent the award of moral damages, Mailene testi ed that she felt afraid, worried
and suffered sleepless nights. The said testimony is substantial to prove the injury
suffered by Mailene for it is only her who can personally approximate the emotional
suffering she experienced. 1 7 Under 2217 1 8 of the New Civil Code, moral damages
include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, wounded feelings,
moral shock and similar injury.
Willful injury to property is likewise a legal ground for awarding moral damages if
the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages are justly due, viz.:
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be legal ground for awarding
moral damages if the court should nd that, under the circumstances, such
damages are justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where
the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
The award of exemplary damages is likewise a rmed. Exemplary or corrective
damages are imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition
to moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. 1 9 The acts of Elizabeth
caused damage to Mailene's property and likewise caused the latter physical suffering.
The only condition for the imposition of exemplary damages is that it must be
reasonable and commensurate with the damage incurred and suffering caused.
WHEREFORE , in light of all the foregoing, the petition is DENIED . Petitioner
Elizabeth David y Lozada is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Malicious
Mischief as de ned by Article 327 and penalized by Article 329 of the Revised Penal
Code. The Decision dated August 31, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No.
39232 is AFFIRMED with the modi cation that petitioner Elizabeth David y Lozada
is meted the sentence of thirty (30) days of arresto menor. She is likewise ordered to
pay private complainant Mailene A. Caparroso, the total amount of Php4,000.00 by way
of actual damages, Php30,000.00 by way of moral damages, Php20,000.00 by way of
exemplary damages, and an interest of six percent (6%) 2 0 per annum on the total
obligation from finality of this Resolution until full satisfaction. SDHTEC

SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTO
Division Clerk of Court
By:
TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
Deputy Division Clerk of Court

Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 3-44.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 2. Penned by Associate Justice Socorro B. Inting, with Associate Justices Marlene Gonzales-
Sison and Rafael Antonio M. Santos, concurring; id. at 45-53.
3. Rendered by Presiding Judge Edgardo R. Bellosillo; id. at 54-58.

4. Id. at 54.
5. Id.

6. Id. at 55.
7. Id.

8. Id. at 62-65.
9. Id. at 65.
10. Id. at 54-58.

11. Id. at 57-58.

12. Id. at 45-52.

13. Id. at 52.

14. Taguinod v. People, 675 Phil. 27, 35-36 (2011), citing People v. De Leon, 599 Phil. 759, 767
(2009); People v. Clidoro, 449 Phil. 142, 149 (2003); People v. De Leon, 428 Phil. 556, 572
(2002).
15. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, Vol. II, p. 326.

   1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of another;

   2. That such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction;

   3. That the act of damaging another's property be committed merely for the sake of
damaging it.

16. AN ACT ADJUSTING THE AMOUNT OR THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AND DAMAGE ON
WHICH A PENALTY IS BASED, AND THE FINES IMPOSED UNDER THE REVISED PENAL
CODE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS "THE
REVISED PENAL CODE," AS AMENDED. Approved on August 29, 2017.
17. Rollo, p. 57.

18. Art. 2217. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious
anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shocks, social humiliation, and
similar injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be
recovered if they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act or omission.

19. CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Article 2229.

20. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetray Board Resolution No. 796, Section 1, dated May 16,
2013.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com