Case Digest (G.R. No. 95850)
Facts:
The case involves the appeal of Renee Parojinog y Namuag against the Decision of the Court of Appeals convicting him of triple murder. On March 31, 1984, Parojinog, along with his co-accused Ronie Aljo (alias Commander Tiko), Bert Dingding, and others, was implicated in ambushing law enforcement personnel in Ozamiz City. Specifically, the ambush resulted in the deaths of three lawmen: P/Sgt. Alex Velasquez, P/Cpl. Antonio Carreon, and Sgt. Aludio Torres. The ambush occurred at the boundary of Barangay Sangay Daku and Sangay Diot, where a group of 23 accused, armed with firearms, lay in wait for the officers who were performing their duties. Following the ambush, the accused were charged with triple murder on the basis that their actions were executed with treachery, aiming to ensure the execution without risk to themselves.
Upon arraignment on January 29, 1988, Parojinog pleaded not guilty, and his trial proceeded while co-accused remained at large. On September 1, 1989, the R
Case Digest (G.R. No. 95850)
Facts:
- On March 31, 1984, in Barangay Sangay (Ozamiz City), a group of 23 individuals—two women armed with .38 caliber pistols and the others with Armalite and Garand rifles—conducted an ambush on law enforcement officers and soldiers. During the attack, P/Sgt. Alex Velasquez, P/Cpl. Antonio Carreon (both from the Integrated National Police), and Sgt. Aludio Torres (from the Philippine Constabulary) were fatally shot.
- The accused–Renee Parojinog y Namuag among others–was charged with triple murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code with qualifying circumstances of treachery and the aggravating circumstance of acting in “band.”
- Prior to trial, during an investigation at the Ozamiz City jail, the accused was interviewed by Pcpl. Benjamin de los Santos and gave an extra-judicial confession. In that confession, he admitted to being a member of the New People’s Army (NPA), to participation in the ambush and to knowing of Sgt. Torres’ fate.
- The investigation was accompanied by Atty. Fernando Fuentes III who was assigned to assist the accused. Testimonies by Atty. Fuentes and City Fiscal Luzminda Uy confirmed that the accused was informed of his right to counsel and to remain silent. The accused signed the confession after such advisement.
- During trial, while the prosecution’s case heavily relied on the extra-judicial confession (marked as Exhibits “A” and “A-1”) and testimonies of law enforcement witnesses, the accused attempted to present an alibi stating he was at home working in his cornfield. He later contended post-trial that his constitutional right to advise of counsel was violated since the lawyer assigned was not his choice and allegedly did not attend the investigation.
- Initially, the lower court sentenced him to an indeterminate imprisonment ranging from ten years and one day (prision mayor) to eighteen years, eight months and one day (reclusion temporal) for murder; however, on appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the conviction by imposing three penalties of reclusion perpetua, corresponding to the murder of the three lawmen, and increased the civil indemnity payable to the victims’ heirs.
Issues:
- Whether the extra-judicial confession, which formed the basis of the conviction, was admissible given the accused’s claim of denial of his constitutional right to consult a lawyer of his own choice during the custodial investigation.
- Whether the weight and credibility given to the extra-judicial confession, in view of the alibi presented by the accused, justified the imposition of three penalties of reclusion perpetua for the murder of the three lawmen.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)