The People of the Philippines Vs. Patricio Amigo

The People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee

Vs.

Patricio Amigo alias "Bebot," Accused-Appellant


G.R. No. 116719, January 18, 1996


Facts:

On December 29, 1989 at around 1:00 Pm, Benito Ng Suy was driving their gray Ford Fiera back home, with his daughters, Jocelyn Ng Suy and a younger one together with his two year old son. An accidental head on collision occurred between the Fiera and the Tamaraw being driven by one Virgillio Abogado, with Abogado was the accused, Patricio Amigo alias "Bebot". The collision caused slight damage to the right bumper of the Tamaraw.

While Abogado and Benito were having a verbal confrontation, Patricio approached Benito asking the latter to leave the incident as it was only a minor incident. However, Benito said that Patricio should not interfere, which made Patricio irritated and caused the latter to stab Benito, rendering the victim into a critical condition which later caused his death due to a sepsis infection that has already circulated in his body.

Patricio Amigo was charged initially with Frustrated murder, but was modified to the crime of murder to which he was convicted with a penalty of Reclusion Perpetua. Accused-Appellant claims that the penalty of reclusion perpetua is too cruel and harch as a penalty and pleads for sympathy.


Issue:

Whether or Not the penalty imposed upon the accused "Reclusion Perpetua" be modified or reduced by virtue of Section 19 (1) of Article III of the Constitution which prohibits the imposition of death penalty.

Held:

No. The Supreme Court hold that Article III, Section 19 (1) does not change the penalty periods prescribed by Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code except only in so far as it prohibits the imposition of death penalty. The range of the medium and minimum penalties remain the same.

Thus, a person originally subject to death penalty and another who committed the murder without the attendance of any modifying circumstances will now be both punishable with the same medium period although the former is conceitedly more guilty than the latter. But that is the will of the constitution and the duty of the court is to apply the law, disregarding the sympathy or pity for an accused. Dura Lex Sed Lex.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMRC) Vs. National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and Imelda Salazar

Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMRC), Petitioner Vs. National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and Imelda Salazar, Respondents G.R. No. 82511, March 3, 1992 Facts: Private Respondent, "Imelda Salazar" was employed as general systems analyst of Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. (GMRC) While Delfin Saldivar, her close friend, was employed as technical operations' support manager in May 1982. Petitioner GMRC investigated Saldivar's activities due to the reports indicating that the company equipment and spare parts were in custody of Saldivar. The internal audit report also indicated that Saldivar entered into a partnership with Richard A. Yambao, owner and manager of Eledon Engineering Services (Elecon), a supplier often recommended by Saldivar to the petitioner. It also appeared in the course of Maramara's investigation that Imelda Salazar violated company regulations by involving herself in transactions with conflict of interest with t...
Read more

B/Gen. Jose Comendador Vs. Gen. Renato S. De Villa

B/GEN. JOSE COMENDADOR, B/GEN. MARCELO BLANDO, CAPT. DANILO PIZARRO PN, CAPT. MANUEL ISON PN, LTC. ROMELINO GOJO PN (M), LTC. ARSENIO TECSON PA, LTC. RAFAEL GALVEZ PA, LTC. TIBURCIO FUSILLERO PA, LTC. ERICSON AURELIO PA, LTC. JACINTO LIGOT PA, LTC. FRANKLIN BRAWNER PA, MAJ. ALFREDO OLIVEROS PA, MAJ. CESAR DE LA PENA PN (M): MAJ. LEUVINO VALENCIA PA, CAPT. FLORENCIO FLORES PA, CAPT. JAIME JUNIO PA, CAPT. DANILO LIM PA, CAPT. ELMER AMON PAF CAPT. VERGEL NACINO, and LT. JOEY SARROZA, petitioners,  vs. B/GEN. DEMETRIO CAMUA COL. HERMINIO A. MENDOZA, COL. ERNESTO B. YU, COL. ROMEO ODI COL. WILLY FLORENDO, COL. DIONY A. VENTURA, and CAPT. FRANCISCO T. MALLILLIN PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL NO. 14, respondents. G.R. No. 96948, August 2, 1991 Facts: Petitioners are officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and were charged with violations of Articles of War in relation with their alleged participation in a failed coup d'etat. The charges against them ...
Read more

Lydia O. Chua Vs. The Civil Service Commission, The National Irrigation Administration

Lydia O. Chua, Petitioner Vs. The Civil Service Commission, The National Irrigation Administration, Respondents G.R. No. 88979, February 7, 1992 Facts: Republic Act 6683 provided benefits for early retirement and voluntary separation as well as for involuntary separation due to reorganization. Section 2 (Coverage) of R.A. 6683 provides who are qualified to avail the benefits under the law which includes all regular, temporary, casual and emergency employees who have rendered two consecutive years of government service as of the date of separation with the exception of uniformed personnel of (Armed Forced of the Philippines) AFP and (Philippine Constabulary Integrated National Police) PC/INP. Petitioner Lydia Chua, believing that she is qualified to avail of the benefits of the Early Retirement Law, filed an application to the Respondent National Irrigation Administration (NIA), which was denied since petitioner is a co-terminus employee. She appealed with resp...
Read more