Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5520)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5520)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Moro Sabilul, G. R. No. L-5520, July 31, 1953, the Supreme Court En Banc, Paras, C.J., writing for the Court.
The City Fiscal of Basilan City filed an information for murder qualified by treachery and evident premeditation against Moro Sabilul on November 11, 1949, in the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga. At the initial hearing on November 24, 1949, defense counsel manifested that the accused would plead guilty and prayed that the penalty be limited to destierro on the ground that the killing occurred when the deceased, Moro Lario, was committing sexual intercourse with appellant's wife, Mora Mislayan. The fiscal opposed and urged that the killing had been done in cold blood. Without taking further evidence, the trial judge accepted the plea and found the accused guilty of murder, sentencing him to prision mayor; the accused appealed.
The Supreme Court, in a prior decision (People v. Moro Sabilul, G.R. No. L-3765, June 21, 1951), set aside that judgment and ordered a new trial, observing there appeared to have been a misunderstanding as to the plea of guilty and quoting U.S. v. Jamad on the danger of improvident guilty pleas and the advisability of taking additional evidence in grave criminal cases.
On remand the Court of First Instance set a new trial for November 7, 1951. The trial judge, under the impression that a plea of guilty had been entered, directed the defense to present its evidence first, reserving rebuttal to the prosecution. The defense presented testimony by appellant and his wife that, on September 14, 1949, appellant surprised Lario in the act of having intercourse with Mislayan at a creek, picked up a pira found nearby, slashed Lario in the face, pursued him and inflicted further wounds until Lario died; appellant surrendered himself and the weapon. The prosecution's rebuttal evidence focused on circumstantial facts: the distance (about 100 meters) and obstacles between the alleged scene and where the body was found, the absence of blood along the purported pursuit route, the severe nature and number of wounds on Lario, and other inconsistencies. The trial court again found appellant guilty, applied Section 106 of the Administrative Code for Mindanao and Sulu in imposing an indeterminate sentence (6 years and 1 day to 8 years prision mayor), ordered indemnity to heirs, and assessed costs; appellant again appealed to this Court.
On review, the Court examined whether the plea of guilty had been properly understood and whether the killing was justified (defense of person/rights) or, alternatively, punishable under Article 247 (destierro) of the Revised Penal Code. The opinion contains a majority disposition modifying the conviction to one under Article 247, and a separate dissent by Justice Tuason.
Issues:
- Was the accused's manifested plea of guilty a valid unconditional plea, or must it be treated as a plea of not guilty because it was conditional or the product of misunderstanding?
- Was the killing justified by the justifying circumstance of defense of person and rights of another under Article 11, paragraph 2, of the Revised Penal Code?
- If not justified, was the killing properly classified under Article 247 (destierro) of the Revised Penal Code, and what penalty should be imposed?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)