Gamas V Oco Digest
Gamas V Oco Digest
Petitioners were accused of stealing php4,500 worth of corn, they were caught
together with two others hauling it to tricycles. Respondent Judge arraigned them without
the presence of their counsel and did not properly inform the accused of what follows after
their admission of the crime.
Throughout the the talk between the accused and the respondent Judge, there
were no records of the accused having availed of an attorney or counsel de oficio.
Respondent Judge did inform the accused of their rights but not in the manner
that guarantees that they have voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waived such
rights.
Respondent judge failed to furnish complainants a copy of the information with the
list of the witnesses.
Issue: Did the accused waive the right to counsel?
Held: No, they were informed of their rights but not adequately. Respondent Judge Oco
is guilty of gross ignorance of the law and to be fined php20,000 from his retirement
benefits.