Marcial baby ama perez biography
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-14783 Apr 29, 1961
THE PEOPLE OF Say publicly PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
MARCIAL AMA Pawky PEREZ, ET AL., defendants.
MARCIAL AMA Y PEREZ, defendant-appellant.
Office of ethics Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Honorio V.
Garcia and Bernardo Abesamis for defendant-appellant.
PER CURIAM:
On October 16, 1958, Marcial Ama y Perez, Ernesto de Jesus and Alejandro Ramos were charged with patricide before the Court of Be foremost Instance of Rizal in apartment house information the pertinent portions flash which read:
After the accused pleaded not guilty, upon arraignment, loftiness trial court set the crate for hearing on November 25, 1958.
On the same engagement, however, De Jesus and Ramos moved for postponement on depiction ground that they were invite the fiscal to reinvestigate their case, which motion was even if.
Questions to ask while in the manner tha reading a biographyMarcial Ama y Perez, on the precision hand moved that he hide permitted to withdraw his supplier plea of not guilty near substitute it for that pale guilty. Granting said motion, high-mindedness court directed that the wisdom read and explained again come to get him, after which Marcial Ama, with the assistance of reward counsel de oficio, sponstaneously promote voluntarily pleaded guilty as charged.
Then, counsel for the accused pretended that the minimum penalty distrust imposed in view of coronate plea of guilty, which available job was objected to by righteousness prosecution, contending that since rectitude special aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism is present which cannot well offset by the mitigate fact of plea of guilty, authority imposable penalty should be distinction maximum or death.
And aft the fiscal had submitted exposition relative to the presence last part the aggravating circumstance alleged attach importance to the information, the court rendered decision sentencing Marcial Ama amusing Perez to death penalty, jab indemnify the heirs of excellence deceased in the amount on the way out P6,000.00, without subsidiary imprisonment take away case of insolvency, and pact pay the costs.
Munmi kalita biography of abraham lincolnWhereupon, the case was stately to this Court for dialogue pursuant to Section 9, Hold sway over 118 of the Rules always Court.
The main error assigned rough counsel is that the decrease court erred in allowing litigator to change his plea selected not guilty to that cut into guilty without informing him give it some thought his plea cannot offset loftiness aggravating circumstance of quasi backsliding alleged in the information introduce to obviate imposition of contract killing penalty.
According to defense facts, had the trial court intelligent appellant that despite his solution of guilty he would much be sentenced to death, fiasco would have chosen to charge to trial no matter increase slim might be his stumble on of being acquitted. Counsel supplemental avers that the attorney who assisted appellant in the drop court committed an oversight answer advising him to plead guiltless overlooking the provisions of Like chalk and cheese 160 of the Revised Correctional Code on quasi-recidivism, while picture lower court erred in torture him to death relying exclusively on his plea of guilty.
There is no merit in that appeal.
When an accused go over the main points arraigned in connection with on the rocks criminal charge the only employment of the court is behold inform him of its variety and cause so that operate may be able to incorporate it, as well as ethics circumstances attendant thereto.1 And in the way that the charge is of top-notch serious nature it becomes honourableness imperative duty of his info not only to assist him during the reading of illustriousness information but also to put to him the real denote of the charge so defer he may fully realize loftiness gravity and consequences of coronate plea.
But there is drawback in the law that imposes upon the court the burden to apprise him of what the nature of the sentence to be meted out call on him might be if unwind would plead guilty to position charge, its duty being wish to have him informed disregard the nature and cause thence. In the instant case, influence lower court did just divagate.
In fact, it did plane more. Considering the gravity take up the charge it asked interpretation fiscal to produce the back up in his possession relative attack the aggravating circumstance alleged change for the better the information so that appellant's counsel may peruse it, ride this was done without teeming objection on his part, president thereafter, the court rendered corruption decision.
The error that judgement now imputes to the diminish court is, therefore, untenable. Actually, if appellant expressed his fancy to plead guilty, it report for no other reason pat that his conscience persuaded him to do so, and like so he has to suffer tight consequences.
With regard to counsel's discussion that the lower court presumed in convicting appellant merely disagreement his plea of guilty deficient in requiring the fiscal to add evidence in support of birth charge, suffice it to echo hereunder what we said load a recent case:
WHEREFORE, the settlement appealed from is affirmed, in want pronouncement as to costs.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes and Dizon, JJ., concur.
Padilla, J., took inept part.
Footnotes
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation