Title
People vs. Ortilla y Panganiban
Case
G.R. No. L-31653
Decision Date
May 18, 1984
A grenade explosion killed Rodolfo Carlos in 1969. Renato Ortilla confessed but claimed coercion. The Supreme Court acquitted him, ruling confessions inadmissible due to coercion and lack of direct evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-31653)

Background of the Incident

At around 11:00 PM on the aforementioned date, Ortilla, seeking revenge against a person named Ladislao Garcia, threw a hand grenade at the vicinity of the library. The victim, Carlos, was not the intended target but a friend of Garcia, resulting in Carlos’s death from multiple shrapnel wounds. Ortilla was arrested, detained, and during his interrogation, provided written confessions detailing his involvement in the crime.

Evidence and Confession

During two separate interrogations, Ortilla admitted to the crime in several handwritten statements. These affidavits included a sketch of the crime scene and a drawing of the grenade. The confessions were executed under the supervision of Manila Assistant City Fiscal Ricardo Conjares, who attested to the validity and voluntariness of these statements.

Defense Claims

Ortilla’s defense relied on allegations that his confessions were involuntary, claiming that he was subjected to torture and maltreatment at the hands of the police during his detainment. Evidence of physical injuries was presented, verified by Dr. Mariano Lara from the Manila Police Department, who noted these injuries were consistent with having been inflicted four days prior to Ortilla's examination, suggesting possible abuse by police officials on July 26, 1969.

Trial and Conviction

The Circuit Criminal Court of Manila found Ortilla guilty of murder, asserting that the confessions were adequately corroborated by the details he provided and by the absence of eyewitness testimony contradicting his admissions. The court computed the sentence to be death due to the aggravating circumstances of treachery and the use of an explosive device.

Appeal and Reversal of Conviction

On appeal, Ortilla contended that the prosecution's case lacked sufficient direct evidence linking him to the actual act of throwing the grenade. He argued that the confessions drawn from him were null due to their involuntary nature, which violated his constitutional rights against self-incrimination. Previous rulings on the inadmissibility of coerced confessions were referenced, establishing that any confession obtained through intimidation invalidated i

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.