Case Digest (G.R. No. 166391) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
This case involves the People of the Philippines as the plaintiff-appellee against the accused-appellants Marcos Paramil y Carurucan, Danilo Dela Cruz y Vicente, and William Osotio, also known as "Iyok." The case was decided by the Regional Trial Court of Tayug, Pangasinan, Branch 52, with the decision rendered on March 31, 2000. The accused were convicted of the crimes of Murder and Carnapping, receiving the death penalty in both instances.
The case stems from events that occurred on June 7, 1995, in Barangay Zamora, Tayug, Pangasinan. On this day, Lito Ignacio, the victim and driver of a tricycle owned by Nelson Aquino, was reported missing after failing to return home after work. Aquino suspected that Ignacio might have hired out the tricycle. The following day, while searching for Ignacio, Aquino learned from local authorities about Ignacio's death and the discovery of blood on the tricycle's sidecar.
The involvement of the accused was initiated on June 8,
Case Digest (G.R. No. 166391) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
# Background of the Case
The case involves the accused-appellants Marcos Paramil y Carurucan, Danilo dela Cruz y Vicente, and William Osotio @ "Iyok," who were convicted of Murder and Carnapping by the Regional Trial Court of Tayug, Pangasinan. The court sentenced them to death for both crimes. The case is on automatic review before the Supreme Court.
# The Criminal Acts
- Murder (Criminal Case No. T-1698):
On June 7, 1995, in Barangay Zamora, Tayug, Pangasinan, the accused conspired to kill Lito Ignacio. They hit him with a stone and shot him with a .38-caliber gun, causing his death.
- Carnapping (Criminal Case No. T-1699):
On the same date, the accused forcibly took a Yamaha RS Torque Induction tricycle from Lito Ignacio, its driver, without the consent of the owner, Nelson Aquino.
# Investigation and Arrest
- The tricycle owner, Nelson Aquino, reported the missing vehicle and driver to the police.
- The tricycle’s blood-stained sidecar was found in San Quintin, Pangasinan, leading to the discovery of Lito Ignacio’s body.
- Accused Danilo dela Cruz was flagged down while driving the stolen motorcycle. Upon investigation, he admitted to the theft and implicated his co-accused, Paramil and Osotio.
# Admissions by the Accused
During the trial, the accused admitted to carnapping the tricycle and killing Lito Ignacio. They claimed they did not intend to kill him but resorted to violence when he resisted.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of Murder qualified by the aggravating circumstance of superior strength, despite it not being alleged in the criminal information.
- Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of superior strength in imposing the penalty.
- Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty for Carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 (Anti-Carnapping Law of 1972).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
- Murder (Criminal Case No. T-1698):
- Carnapping (Criminal Case No. T-1699):
# Investigation and Arrest
- The tricycle owner, Nelson Aquino, reported the missing vehicle and driver to the police.
- The tricycle’s blood-stained sidecar was found in San Quintin, Pangasinan, leading to the discovery of Lito Ignacio’s body.
- Accused Danilo dela Cruz was flagged down while driving the stolen motorcycle. Upon investigation, he admitted to the theft and implicated his co-accused, Paramil and Osotio.
# Admissions by the Accused
During the trial, the accused admitted to carnapping the tricycle and killing Lito Ignacio. They claimed they did not intend to kill him but resorted to violence when he resisted.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of Murder qualified by the aggravating circumstance of superior strength, despite it not being alleged in the criminal information.
- Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of superior strength in imposing the penalty.
- Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty for Carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 (Anti-Carnapping Law of 1972).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of Murder qualified by the aggravating circumstance of superior strength, despite it not being alleged in the criminal information.
- Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of superior strength in imposing the penalty.
- Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty for Carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 (Anti-Carnapping Law of 1972).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)