Title
People vs. Amigo
Case
G.R. No. 116719
Decision Date
Jan 18, 1996
Patricio Amigo stabbed Benito Ng Suy after a minor vehicular accident, leading to Benito's death. Charged with murder, Patricio was sentenced to reclusion perpetua, upheld by the Supreme Court despite the abolition of the death penalty.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 116719)

Key Dates

Offense: December 29, 1989
Trial Court Decision: April 1992 (TSN)
Court of Appeals Decision: January 18, 1996

Applicable Law

Revised Penal Code, Article 248 (murder) in relation to Article 5 (degree of execution)
1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 19(1) (prohibition of the death penalty; reduction to reclusion perpetua)

Factual Background

While driving his family home after business hours, Benito Ng Suy’s Ford Fiera collided head-on with an orange Toyota Tamaraw driven by Virgilio Abogada, in which Patricio Amigo was a passenger. After a brief verbal altercation initiated by Ng Suy, Amigo interjected, provoked by Ng Suy’s rebuff and reference to his Chinese ethnicity. Amigo left momentarily, returned, drew a five-inch knife, and stabbed Ng Suy twice in the chest. The victim attempted to flee but Amigo pursued, embracing him and inflicting multiple stab wounds to the arm, chest, abdomen, diaphragm, pancreas, duodenum, colon, and thigh. Ng Suy was rushed to San Pedro Hospital, then airlifted to Chinese General Hospital, where he succumbed three weeks later to sepsis resulting from thirteen stab wounds.

Procedural History

  1. Trial Court (Davao City RTC): Charged originally with frustrated murder; amended to murder upon victim’s death.
  2. RTC Decision: Found Amigo guilty of murder under Article 248, imposed reclusion perpetua, awarded actual, compensatory, and moral damages.
  3. Accused-Appellant’s Appeal: Argued that under Section 19(1), Article III of the 1987 Constitution (in force at the time of the offense), the death penalty no longer existed and the proper penalty should be reclusion temporal in its medium period.

Constitutional Framework and Precedent

Section 19(1), Article III of the 1987 Constitution prohibits the imposition of the death penalty and mandates its reduction to reclusion perpetua where applicable. In People v. Muñoz (170 SCRA 107, 1989), this Court clarified that the constitutional abolition of the death penalty does not alter the minimum and medium periods of penalties prescribed in the Revised Penal Code; it only converts the penalty of death into reclusion perpetua. Prior decisions had divided the reduced penalty into three new periods, but Muñoz restored the original scheme of Article 248, preserving the minimum and medium periods of reclusion temporal and making reclusion perpetua the maximum.

Issue

Whether the penalty for murder, committed on December 29, 1989—after the 1987 Constitution took effect—is reclusion perpetua (as death was abolished by the Constitution) or reclusion temporal in its medium period (as argued by the accused-appellant).

Supreme Court Ruling

Applying the 1987 Constitution, the Court held that Article III, Section 19(1) abolishes the death penalty but does not modify the remai

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.