Case Digest (G.R. No. L-37908)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Benjamin Ong y Kho, et al., G.R. No. L-37908, October 23, 1981, Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion Jr., J., writing for the Court.The prosecution (the People of the Philippines) charged Baldomero Ambrosio, alias "Val" with Kidnapping with Murder for the April 23–24, 1971 killing of Henry Chua; co-accused in the information included Benjamin Ong y Kho, Bienvenido Quintos y Sumaljag, and Fernando Tan (alias "Oscar Tan"). Benjamin Ong and Bienvenido Quintos had already been tried before the Circuit Criminal Court of Pasig, convicted, and were the subjects of automatic review in G.R. No. L-34497 (decided January 30, 1975), where this Court found them guilty of murder with qualifying and aggravating circumstances and imposed reclusion perpetua.
On the night of April 23, 1971, Henry Chua was last seen with Benjamin Ong. Chua disappeared; when Ong was later apprehended (Aug. 29, 1971) and transferred to the NBI, he confessed on Sept. 1, 1971, implicating Quintos and leading to the discovery and exhumation of Chua’s decomposed body. Quintos likewise confessed and identified Fernando Tan and Baldomero Ambrosio as participants. After Ambrosio’s arrest in August 1972, the Provincial Fiscal of Rizal filed an information charging all four with Kidnapping with Murder. Ambrosio pleaded not guilty (arraigned Aug. 26, 1972). The trial court (Circuit Criminal Court, Seventh Judicial District) convicted Ambrosio on Oct. 17, 1973 and sentenced him to death, with indemnity, moral and exemplary damages jointly and severally with Ong and Quintos.
The prosecution’s case relied on autopsy findings by Dr. Ricardo Ibarrola (stab wounds to the liver; possible asphyxiation), identification of the body by the victim’s brother, the extrajudicial confessions and re-enactments by Ong and Quintos (which led to recovery of the body and physical evidence), and Quintos’s in-court testimony (Exhibit “1”) describing Ambrosio’s active role—pulling Chua from his car, tying and gagging him, driving the car with the victim, focusing a flashlight during the stabbing, helping carry and bury the body, and covering the grave.
Ambrosio’s defense was that he acted under orders and threats from Fernando Tan and thus was an unwilling participant; he also alleged his extrajudicial statement (Exhibit “S”) was obtained by maltreatment. The defense additionally argued that the Circuit Criminal Court lacked jurisdiction over kidnapping (a ground addressed by the Court in light of G.R. No. L-34497). The trial court disbe...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Circuit Criminal Court have jurisdiction to try the offense charged against Baldomero Ambrosio?
- Was Ambrosio proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt as a voluntary participant in the killing of Henry Chua, and is the death s...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)