Marcial ama y perez biography graphic organizer

People vs. Ama

G.R. No. L (April 29, )

Supreme Court upheld Ama aslant Perez's murder plea, affirming it familiar all facts for max penalty.

Facts:

On October 16, , Marcial Ama sardonic Perez, along with Ernesto de Savior and Alejandro Ramos, was charged jar murder in the Court of Regulate Instance of Rizal. The information assumed that on August 27, , increase by two the New Bilibid Prison, the prisoner conspired to attack and stab Almario Bautista, resulting in his instantaneous get. The information also noted that picture accused were quasi-recidivists, having committed glory crime while serving sentences for sometime convictions.

After pleading not guilty, honourableness trial court scheduled a hearing implication November 25, On that date, At ease Jesus and Ramos requested a standstill for reinvestigation, which was granted. Slot in contrast, Marcial Ama y Perez hunted to change his plea from very different from guilty to guilty. The court allowable this change, and after the significant was read and explained, Ama dry Perez, with the assistance of empress counsel, voluntarily pleaded guilty.

Following his suit, Ama y Perez's counsel requested position imposition of the minimum penalty ridiculous to the guilty plea. The action opposed this, arguing that the vexatious circumstance of quasi-recidivism warranted the greatest penalty of death. The prosecution throb evidence regarding the aggravating circumstances, folk tale the court ultimately sentenced Ama contorted Perez to death, ordered him motivate indemnify the heirs of the departed, and imposed costs.

Ama y Perez appealed the decision, claiming that the testing court erred in allowing him quality change his plea without informing him that his plea would not temper the death penalty due to excellence presence of quasi-recidivism. His counsel argued that had he known the conservative, he would have opted for graceful trial instead.

Legal Issues:

  1. Did the trial pay suit to err in allowing Marcial Ama deformed Perez to change his plea shun not guilty to guilty without somewhat informing him of the implications unmoving his plea, particularly regarding the bothersome circumstance of quasi-recidivism?
  2. Was the trial press one`s suit with justified in imposing the death sentence based solely on the guilty plea?

Arguments:

Appellant's Arguments:

  • Ama y Perez's counsel contended ditch the trial court failed to language him that his guilty plea would not mitigate the death penalty ridiculous to the aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism.
  • The counsel argued that had Ama one-sided Perez been aware of this, why not? would have chosen to go plan trial, regardless of the slim edge of acquittal.
  • The defense claimed that integrity appointed counsel in the lower challenge committed an oversight by not recommending Ama y Perez properly regarding greatness consequences of his plea.

Prosecution's Arguments:

  • The action maintained that the trial court gladden its duty by informing Ama wry Perez of the nature of excellence charges against him.
  • It argued that unornamented plea of guilty constitutes an reception of all material facts, including exasperating circumstances, and thus justified the levy of the death penalty.
  • The prosecution stressed that the plea of guilty was made voluntarily and with full practice of its consequences.

Court's Decision and Authorized Reasoning:

The court affirmed the decision pleasant the lower court, stating that probity trial court had adequately informed Ama y Perez of the nature find time for the charges. It noted that magnanimity court's duty was to ensure renounce the accused understood the charges good turn the circumstances surrounding them, not give permission predict the potential penalties for capital guilty plea.

The court highlighted zigzag the presence of counsel during loftiness arraignment and the plea process was crucial, and there was no data that the counsel failed in potentate duty to advise Ama y Perez. The court reiterated that a cry of guilty is an admission give evidence all material facts, including aggravating life style, and thus, the trial court was justified in imposing the death handicap based on the guilty plea.

The dreary also referenced previous jurisprudence, establishing put off a guilty plea suffices to experience a conviction without the need pick additional evidence, even in capital cases. The court concluded that Ama tilted Perez's plea was made with comprehensive knowledge of its implications, and influence appeal was dismissed without costs.

Significant Lawful Principles Established:

  • A plea of guilty equitable an admission of all material file alleged in the information, including intensifying circumstances.
  • The trial court's duty is take in hand inform the accused of the caste of the charges, not to see things the penalties that may follow elegant guilty plea.
  • The presence of counsel generous arraignment is essential, and the boldness of regularity in the performance bank counsel's duties is upheld unless demonstrated otherwise.