Title
People vs. Ordono
Case
G.R. No. 132154
Decision Date
Jun 29, 2000
A 15-year-old girl was raped and murdered in 1994. Two men confessed without counsel, later claiming coercion. The Supreme Court ruled their confessions inadmissible due to lack of counsel but upheld their conviction for rape with homicide, imposing death penalties.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 179382)

Facts:

  • Commission and Investigation
    • On August 5, 1994 the decomposing body of 15-year-old Shirley Victore was found near a bridge in Santol, La Union; post-mortem by Dr. Llavore showed rape and strangulation.
    • Unidentified sources pointed to Pacito Ordoño alias Asing and Apolonio Medina alias Poling; they were invited for questioning on August 5, released for lack of evidence, then returned on August 10 to confess.
  • Extrajudicial Confessions
    • At Santol police station they were apprised in dialect of their right to remain silent and to counsel; no lawyer was available, so a parish priest, the municipal mayor, relatives and police officers witnessed their written, signed or thumb-printed confessions.
    • DZNL radio announcer Roland Almoite interviewed both in a taped session at the station; they again admitted their participation and their statements were broadcast.
    • Five to eight days later PAO counsel Oscar Corpuz privately advised each accused of their rights; they re-affixed signatures/thumbmarks, then appeared before MTC Judge Bautista who again informed them of their rights and certified voluntariness.
  • Trial and Defense
    • The Regional Trial Court (Branch 34, Balaoan) admitted the extrajudicial confessions and radio tape, convicted both of rape with homicide on two counts, and imposed two death penalties each.
    • In their defense the accused alleged coercion and torture during interrogation, denial of counsel, and offered alibi (farm work and banana-carrying), which the prosecution disputed.

Issues:

  • Whether the extrajudicial confessions obtained without counsel at the start of custodial interrogation are admissible.
  • Whether subsequent PAO counsel assistance and judicial confirmation cured any constitutional infirmity.
  • Whether the taped radio interview constitutes admissible evidence.
  • Whether the evidence, including medico-legal findings, sufficed to prove rape with homicide in conspiracy and negated torture and alibi defenses.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.