Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 37 views

    Case Digests Ni Kat: Tag Archives: People v. Mojello

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous
    1. The appellant Bebot Mojello was apprehended and confessed to raping and killing 11-year-old Lenlen Rayco. 2. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt but modified the crime to statutory rape rather than rape with homicide due to insufficient evidence that the rape caused the victim's death. 3. The extrajudicial confession was found to be valid and admissible because the appellant was informed of his constitutional rights and he failed to prove his claims that the confession was coerced.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digests Ni Kat: Tag Archives: People v. Mojello

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous
    37 views1 page
    1. The appellant Bebot Mojello was apprehended and confessed to raping and killing 11-year-old Lenlen Rayco. 2. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt but modified the crime to statutory rape rather than rape with homicide due to insufficient evidence that the rape caused the victim's death. 3. The extrajudicial confession was found to be valid and admissible because the appellant was informed of his constitutional rights and he failed to prove his claims that the confession was coerced.

    Original Title

    Safari - 21 Oct 2017 at 11_38 PM.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The appellant Bebot Mojello was apprehended and confessed to raping and killing 11-year-old Lenlen Rayco. 2. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt but modified the crime to statutory rape rather than rape with homicide due to insufficient evidence that the rape caused the victim's death. 3. The extrajudicial confession was found to be valid and admissible because the appellant was informed of his constitutional rights and he failed to prove his claims that the confession was coerced.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digests Ni Kat: Tag Archives: People v. Mojello

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous
    1. The appellant Bebot Mojello was apprehended and confessed to raping and killing 11-year-old Lenlen Rayco. 2. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt but modified the crime to statutory rape rather than rape with homicide due to insufficient evidence that the rape caused the victim's death. 3. The extrajudicial confession was found to be valid and admissible because the appellant was informed of his constitutional rights and he failed to prove his claims that the confession was coerced.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    CASE DIGESTS NI KAT

    In Good Faith

    BUNGAD

    Tag Archives: People v. Mojello


    !
    4 People v. Mojello, 425 SCRA 11 (2004)
    APR
    2014 posted in CONLAW2 cases
    DIG IN!
    Facts
    A Simple Reminder

    SAN MIGUEL PROPERTIES


    PHILS., INC. v SPOUSES
    The victim was last seen with the appellant Bebot Mojello. On December ALFREDO and GRACE
    16,200 the body of Lenlen Rayco was found lifeless, naked and bruised on HUANG, G. R. No. 137290, 31
    the seashore. The medico-legal report positively indicated that the victim was July 2000
    raped. NHA v GRACE BAPTIST
    CHURCH, G. R. No. 156437, 1
    March 2004

    When apprehended by the police officers and was subjected to an MUN. OF CAVITE v ROJAS, G.

    investigation on 17 December 1996, the appellant admitted to the crime. R. No. L-9069, 31
    March 1915

    Pollo v. Constantino-David,
    G.R. No. 181881, 18
    Six days after, on 23 December 1996, during custodial investigation, the
    October 2011
    appellant, assisted by his counsel, executed an extrajudicial confession to the
    crime.

    Follow
    TREASURE BOX
    The appellant was charged of the crime of Rape with Homicide defined and
    Agosto 2015 (1)
    penalized under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by
    Republic Act No. 7659.The accused was arraigned and entered a not guilty Hulyo 2014 (3)

    plea. The lower court found him guilty. Hence, an automatic review of the Abril 2014 (4)
    case was submitted to the Supreme Court. Enero 2014 (5)

    Disyembre 2013 (1)

    Issues

    LOGS

    1. WON the extrajudicial confession of the appellant was admissible 30,502 hits
    2. WON the appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
    charged

    Ruling

    The decision of the lower court was affirmed and was modified. The accused
    was found guilty of the crime of statutory rape.

    Ratio Decidendi

    The appellant avers that his extrajudicial confession, and admissions therein,
    should be considered a fruit of a poisonous tree and being such, should be
    inadmissible as evidence against him. The Court disagrees. The Court finds
    the extrajudicial confession in compliance with the strict constitutional
    requirements of the right to counsel as enshrined in Art. III, Sec. 12, par. 1 of
    the Constitution in relation to Rep. Act No. 7438, Sec. 2. The Court observed
    that the confession itself expressly states that the investigating officers
    informed him of such rights

    Further, the appellant claimed that his confession was induced by a threat
    against his life. The Court took cognizance, however, of his failure to present
    evidence to prove such threat and neither did he file any case against the
    person who threatened him nor did he report such incident to his counsel. He
    also claimed that he did not understand the contents of the confession which
    was read in the Visayan dialect, yet he admits that he uses the Visayan
    dialect in his daily discourse.

    The Court also noted that even if improper interrogation methods were used
    at the start, it does not bar the possibility of having a valid confession by
    properly interrogating the subject.

    With regards to the second query, appellant alleges that the lower court
    erred in convicting him of the crime of rape with homicide sentencing him of
    the death penalty despite of the insufficiency of circumstantial evidence to
    prove his guilt.

    The Court sustained the appellant’s conviction on the crime of rape based on
    his admission to the said crime, the medico-legal report and the witness’
    testimony proving the corpus delicti but held that there was no sufficient
    evidence to prove that the appellant killed the victim or that the rape
    committed caused the death of the victim. Therefore, he cannot be convicted
    of the said special complex crime as that would raise a reasonable doubt to
    his guilt.

    The Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime only that
    of statutory rape, the victim being 11 years old, and was sentenced to suffer
    the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

    Advertisements

    !425 SCRA 11 (2004), bill of rights, case ! Mag-iwan ng puna


    brief, digest, People v. Mojello

    Sumulat ng Blog sa WordPress.com.

    You might also like