Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Republic of the Philippines - Campaign
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
APPELLANTS’ BRIEF<br />
People <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Philippines</strong> vs. Fortuna, et. al.<br />
S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64<br />
7. Depriving <strong>the</strong> herein death convicts <strong>of</strong> a last chance to prove <strong>the</strong>ir innocence<br />
by presenting evidence on <strong>the</strong> ABB angle was/would be tantamount to “depriv(ing) <strong>the</strong><br />
accused <strong>of</strong> a full and fair trial,” applying by analogy <strong>the</strong> rulings regarding depriving<br />
accused <strong>of</strong> a medical examination for deaf-muteness, as discussed in People vs. Parazo<br />
(G.R. No. 121176, July 8, 1999) citing People vs. Crisologo (150 SCRA 656), and<br />
regarding depriving accused <strong>of</strong> a mental examination, as discussed in People vs.<br />
Estrada (G.R. No. 130487, June 19, 2000). Parazo resulted in a re-trial while Estrada<br />
resulted in a remand “for fur<strong>the</strong>r proceedings,” which is among <strong>the</strong> relief prayed for in<br />
<strong>the</strong> instant Petition.<br />
The foregoing very good rulings are all for very good reason: our courts, <strong>the</strong><br />
Supreme Court included, cannot afford to commit any mistake in sentencing an<br />
individual to death. Thus, cases involving <strong>the</strong> death penalty should be treated with less<br />
reliance on technical rules, such as in <strong>the</strong> cases recapitulated. The herein accused-<br />
appellants invoke <strong>the</strong> equal protection that was given <strong>the</strong> accused in all those cases,<br />
something which <strong>the</strong> former have not enjoyed so far.<br />
In ending our long discussion <strong>of</strong> arguments on <strong>the</strong> assignment <strong>of</strong> errors, we note<br />
that <strong>the</strong>re is, however, a consuelo de bobo <strong>of</strong> sorts in <strong>the</strong> appealed Order <strong>of</strong> January 26,<br />
2000 (Annex C), namely, its last sentence:<br />
At any rate, as earlier stated, let this Urgent Motion for<br />
Leave <strong>of</strong> Court <strong>of</strong> Fr. Reyes be attached to <strong>the</strong> record as well as<br />
<strong>the</strong> TSN today be attached to <strong>the</strong> record to be considered as<br />
stated by Atty. Bagatsing [counsel for Fortuna] and Atty. Santos<br />
[counsel for Lumanog] as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> pro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
defense. (italics supplied)<br />
And going to <strong>the</strong> said TSN (1/26/00, pp. 8-9), one finds <strong>the</strong> trial court’s admission<br />
as <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> pro<strong>of</strong> certain evidentiary documents on <strong>the</strong> ABB angle pr<strong>of</strong>erred by Atty.<br />
Bagatsing. These are covered, added to and explained in his “Supplemental To The Oral<br />
Manifestation <strong>of</strong> Accused Fortuna” dated February 10, 2000.<br />
Still on <strong>the</strong> said TSN (1/26/00, pp. 20-21), after questioning (but not placing on<br />
<strong>the</strong> witness stand) Fr. Reyes and his counsel, <strong>the</strong> trial court said:<br />
Page 123 <strong>of</strong> 127<br />
123