Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 56 views

    People v. Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero, GR NO. 208404

    Uploaded by

    Yumica Claudelle Balallo
    Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero were charged with kidnapping Nicassius Cordero. The Regional Trial Court found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on Cordero's identification of them as his kidnappers. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also ruled against Devincio Guerrero, finding that he failed to raise objections to his warrantless arrest before his arraignment and thus waived this right. The Court also dismissed Devincio's argument that his rights were violated during his custodial investigation, noting that no extrajudicial confession was used against him. The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerr

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    People v. Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero, GR NO. 208404

    Uploaded by

    Yumica Claudelle Balallo
    56 views2 pages
    Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero were charged with kidnapping Nicassius Cordero. The Regional Trial Court found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on Cordero's identification of them as his kidnappers. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also ruled against Devincio Guerrero, finding that he failed to raise objections to his warrantless arrest before his arraignment and thus waived this right. The Court also dismissed Devincio's argument that his rights were violated during his custodial investigation, noting that no extrajudicial confession was used against him. The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerr

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero were charged with kidnapping Nicassius Cordero. The Regional Trial Court found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on Cordero's identification of them as his kidnappers. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also ruled against Devincio Guerrero, finding that he failed to raise objections to his warrantless arrest before his arraignment and thus waived this right. The Court also dismissed Devincio's argument that his rights were violated during his custodial investigation, noting that no extrajudicial confession was used against him. The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerr

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    56 views2 pages

    People v. Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero, GR NO. 208404

    Uploaded by

    Yumica Claudelle Balallo
    Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero were charged with kidnapping Nicassius Cordero. The Regional Trial Court found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on Cordero's identification of them as his kidnappers. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Supreme Court also ruled against Devincio Guerrero, finding that he failed to raise objections to his warrantless arrest before his arraignment and thus waived this right. The Court also dismissed Devincio's argument that his rights were violated during his custodial investigation, noting that no extrajudicial confession was used against him. The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerr

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    People v.

    Vicente Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero


    GR 208404
    February 24, 2016
    Facts:
    Nicassius Cordero narrated that in the evening of April 20, 1999, while opening the garage door
    of his residence three armed men who was later made known to him as Devincio Guerrero, Tito
    Lugnasin and Elmer Madrid. Thereafter another cohort, Celso Lugnasin, rode with them and
    fifteen minutes after the Superhighway they switched the car with a jeepney, and the driver was
    known to be as Commander who was later identified as Vicente Lugnasin. Cordero was kept in a
    small house for 4 days while they negotiated with Saleena, his sister-in-law, for the ransom
    money. Thereafter, Cordero was released without ransom money being paid. Vicente Lugnasin
    claimed that he only saw Cordero for the first time at the DOJ and Cordero could not even
    identify him. He recounted that on May 14, 1999, while preparing for the town fiesta celebration;
    policemen came to his residence and arrested him and his brother, Tito, and cousin, Excelsio, for
    alleged involvement in a robbery case. They were tortured, and then put on display for media
    men to feast on and for alleged victims to identify. Devincio Guerrero denies his involvement in
    the kidnapping of Cordero. He recalled that nearing Holy Week in 2002, five uniformed
    policemen arrested him without a warrant in Lucena City, where he used to buy smoked fish to
    sell.
    RTC ruled Guilty Beyond Reasonable Doubt (whether or not Cordero’s identification of Vicente
    Lugnasin and Devincio Guerrero as among his kidnappers is reliable).The RTC pointed out
    that Cordero was able to identify both accused-appellants as he saw their faces before he was
    blindfolded.
    CA ruled affirmed the Decision of RTC. In the Devincio’s argument that his warrantless arrest
    was illegal since it did not fall under Section 6, Rule 109 of the Rules of Procedure, as amended,
    CA held that accused-appellant Devincio’s right to question his arrest and subsequent
    inquest/preliminary investigation is deemed waived due to his failure to raise such argument
    before his arraignment.
    Issue: Whether the warrantless arrest of Devincio is valid
    Ruling:
    Devincio and Vicente failed to raise their allegations before their arraignment. They actively
    participated in the trial and posited their defenses without mentioning the alleged illegality of
    their warrantless arrests. They are deemed to have waived their right to question their arrests. In
    the case of Miclat, Jr v. People, the petitioner raised no objection to the irregularity of his arrest
    before his arraignment. Considering this and his active participation in the trial of the case,
    jurisprudence dictates that petitioner is deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the trial
    court, thereby curing any defect in his arrest. An accused is estopped from assailing any
    irregularity of his arrest if he fails to raise this issue or to move for the quashed of the
    information against him on this ground before arraignment. Any objection involving a warrant
    of arrest or the procedure by which the court acquired jurisdiction over the person of the accused
    must be made before he enters his plea; otherwise, the objection is deemed waived. Devincio’s
    argument that his rights were violated during the custodial investigation: in the case of People
    vs. Buluran and Valenzuela any allegation of violation of rights during custodial investigation is
    relevant and material only to cases in which an extrajudicial admission or confession extracted
    from the accused becomes the basis of their conviction. On the case Devincio has not executed
    an extrajudicial confession or admission, hence there was no violation.

    You might also like