Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 298 views

    People Vs Magsino

    Uploaded by

    Patricia Alexis Chan
    Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras were convicted as accomplices in the murder of Jaime Magsino. Magsino was shot and killed by Bongon and the others present also fired their guns at the fallen victim. There is doubt as to whether Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras acted as principals or accomplices, so the court ruled they should be considered accomplices and given the milder form of responsibility, with a penalty one degree lower than that of Bongon, who was determined to be the principal.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People Vs Magsino

    Uploaded by

    Patricia Alexis Chan
    298 views1 page
    Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras were convicted as accomplices in the murder of Jaime Magsino. Magsino was shot and killed by Bongon and the others present also fired their guns at the fallen victim. There is doubt as to whether Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras acted as principals or accomplices, so the court ruled they should be considered accomplices and given the milder form of responsibility, with a penalty one degree lower than that of Bongon, who was determined to be the principal.

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    People vs Magsino

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras were convicted as accomplices in the murder of Jaime Magsino. Magsino was shot and killed by Bongon and the others present also fired their guns at the fallen victim. There is doubt as to whether Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras acted as principals or accomplices, so the court ruled they should be considered accomplices and given the milder form of responsibility, with a penalty one degree lower than that of Bongon, who was determined to be the principal.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    298 views1 page

    People Vs Magsino

    Uploaded by

    Patricia Alexis Chan
    Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras were convicted as accomplices in the murder of Jaime Magsino. Magsino was shot and killed by Bongon and the others present also fired their guns at the fallen victim. There is doubt as to whether Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras acted as principals or accomplices, so the court ruled they should be considered accomplices and given the milder form of responsibility, with a penalty one degree lower than that of Bongon, who was determined to be the principal.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    182152

    February 25, 2013

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and MIRIAM RUTH T. MAGSINO vs.PO1 RICARDO P. EUSEBIO, SP02
    ROMEO ISIDRO, and JOJIT GEORGE CONTRERAS
    At around 6:00p.m. on August 7, 1999, as Jaime Magsino alighted from his motorcycle, Bongon shot him
    three times, causing him to fall. Eusebio and Isidro, together with Contreras, Sy, and Parilla drew their guns
    and they, too, fired at the fallen victim. All six shooters approached Magsino, turned his body over, and
    kicked him as they laughed. Bongon then ordered Rommel Gicoso, 2 a tricyle driver, to take Magsino to the
    Pasay City General Hospital.
    On January 5, 2006 the RTC rendered judgement, 8 finding the accused Bongon guilty of murder, as
    principal and accused Eusebio, Isidro, and Contreras, guilty as accomplices. CA affirmed
    Whether or not the accused Eusebio, Isidro and Contreras should not be convicted as principals for the
    crime of murder but should be deemed to be accomplices.
    It was held that when there is doubt as to whether a guilty participant in a homicide performed the role of
    principal or accomplice, the Court should favor the "milder form of responsibility." He should be given the
    benefit of the doubt and can be regarded only as an accomplice. (People vs. Jose Tamayo, 44 Phil.
    38; People vs. Bantangan, 54 Phil. 834, 840; People vs. Lansang, 82 Phil. 662, 667; People vs. Ubina, 97
    Phil. 515; People vs. Raganit, 88 Phil. 467; People vs. Pastores, 40 SCRA 498; People vs. Tolentino, 40 SCRA
    514). Hence, in the case at bar, the accused Eusebio, Isidro and Contreras should be granted the benefit of
    doubt and should considered merely as accomplices and should be meted a penalty one degree lower than
    that to be imposed on accused Jesus Bongon, Jr. who is unequivocally the principal. 20

    You might also like