Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Lugod
Case
G.R. No. 136253
Decision Date
Feb 21, 2001
An 8-year-old girl was raped and killed in 1997. The accused, Clemente John Lugod, was convicted based on circumstantial evidence and an alleged coerced confession. The Supreme Court acquitted him, citing insufficient proof and constitutional rights violations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 164749)

Petitioner

People of the Philippines (Plaintiff-Appellee)

Respondent

Clemente John Lugod (Accused-Appellant)

Key Dates

  • September 15–16, 1997: Commission of the offense
  • October 10, 1997: Filing of Information for rape with homicide
  • October 8, 1998: RTC conviction and imposition of death penalty
  • February 21, 2001: Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution, Article III, Section 12 (rights of persons under investigation)
  • Republic Act No. 7659, Section 11 (special complex crime of rape with homicide)
  • Rule 113, Section 5(b), Rules of Court (warrantless arrest)
  • Rule 133, Section 4, Rules on Evidence (circumstantial evidence)

Factual Background

On the night of September 15, 1997, Lugod was seen intoxicated, wearing distinctive rubber slippers (red-soled, yellow-and-white straps) and a black collared T-shirt. Multiple witnesses placed him at the victim’s home and at a nearby house in Villa Anastacia. Early on September 16, the victim’s mother discovered the child missing and found the accused’s slippers at the backdoor. A search party later recovered the victim’s soiled panty and the same black T-shirt near the site where the body was eventually found in a coconut plantation. The medico-legal officer testified to an 8 cm vulvar laceration and hypovolemic shock as cause of death.

Procedural History

The Regional Trial Court of Santa Cruz, Laguna (Branch 28) convicted Lugod of rape with homicide under RA 7659 and sentenced him to death, ordering civil indemnities. The case was automatically brought to the Supreme Court for review.

Issues on Appeal

  1. Whether the uncounselled confession and related pointing out of the body violated the accused’s rights under Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution and are therefore inadmissible.
  2. Whether the circumstantial evidence (slippers, T-shirt, presence at crime scene) proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

  1. Admissibility of Confession and Derivative Evidence
  • The accused was arrested without being informed of his rights to remain silent and to counsel; no written waiver was obtained.
  • Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution prohibits the admission of any confession obtained in violation of these rights.
  • The pointing-out of the body was an integral part of the uncounselled confession and thus is fruit of the poisonous tree.
  • The Vice-Mayor’s testimony reflected only ambiguous responses by Lugod, not a clear admission of rape and homicide. Contradictions and the coercive atmosphere (presence of police and hostile townspeople, allegations of maltreatment) also undermined voluntariness.
  • Confession and pointing-out evidence were ruled inadmissible.
  1. Sufficiency of Circumstantial Evidence
  • Under Rule 133, Section 4, circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain leading to guilt to the exclusion of all reasonable hypotheses.
  • The slippers and T-shirt were ordinary articles without unique identifying marks; their presence at the scene established only

...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.