Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Ernas
Case
G.R. No. 137256-58
Decision Date
Aug 6, 2003
Father pleads guilty to raping daughters; SC remands case due to insufficient inquiry and lack of evidence presentation, deeming plea improvident.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 137256-58)

Charges and Proceedings

On October 27, 1998, separate Informations were filed against the appellant, detailing the incidents of rape that occurred in Brgy. Masile, Calamba. The charges stated that the accused had engaged in sexual intercourse with his daughters against their will and consent, utilizing force and intimidation. Following his arraignment on November 13, 1998, the appellant initially pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Change of Plea

On January 13, 1999, during an initial hearing, the appellant's counsel indicated a desire to withdraw the plea of not guilty, and upon inquiry by the trial court, the appellant accepted this change, subsequently entering a voluntary plea of guilty to all counts. The trial court conducted a limited inquiry, establishing that the appellant was aware of the consequences of his guilty plea and confirmed the circumstances of the crimes.

Judgment of Conviction

On January 14, 1999, the trial court rendered a joint judgment convicting the appellant of the crimes charged and sentenced him to death for each count, as well as ordered the payment of moral damages to the victims.

Appellant's Assignment of Error

The appellant raised a single assignment of error, contending that the trial court failed to require the prosecution to prove his guilt despite the plea of guilty. He argued that the trial court's due process requirements under the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure had not been satisfied, as there was no presentation of evidence to establish the circumstances surrounding his actions and the severity of his culpability.

Legal Provisions

Citing Section 3 of Rule 116 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, both court reiterates the necessity for a searching inquiry into a guilty plea involving capital offenses. The requirement entails: (1) assurance of the voluntariness and comprehension of the plea; (2) the prosecution must present evidence affirming the guilt and degree of culpability; and (3) the accused must have the opportunity to present evidence on his behalf.

Failure to Adhere to Procedural Requirements

The Court noted that the trial court did not follow procedural safeguards, failing to confirm with the counsel regarding the meaning and implications of the plea of guilty and neglecting to assess the appellant's understanding fully. There was a lack of inquiry into the appellant's background, such as age and educational status, which would help ascertain his capacity to plead guilty.

Need for Prosecution Evidence

The appellate court determined that the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to forego presenting evidence. Such evidence is crucial not only for establishing guilt but also for determining the level of culpability necessary for imposing the death penalty. The absence of forensic findings to elucidate the case also indicated a failure to meet the burden of proof necessary for capital offenses.

Importance of Comprehensive Inquiry

The rationale behind strict compliance with proc

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.