PEOPLE V.

LARRANAGA

Marijoy – Kidnap, serious illegal detention, homicide with rape

Jaqueline – kidnap, serious illegal detention

PROSECUTION CONTENTION

On the night of 16 July 1997, Chiong sisters lived in Cebu City, and they failed to come home on
the expected time.

18 July 1997, Lasaga reported to the police that a woman found dead at the foot of a cliff in Tan-
awan, Carcar Cebu

20 July 1997, the brother of the chiong sisters proceeded to the Tupaz Funeral to verify the body.
Upon verification it was the same orange shirt and maong pants wore by marijoy when she left
home on 16 July 1997.

07 August 1998, - Rusia was moved that he be discharged as an accused for the purpose utilizing
him as a state witness. (Defense contested because rusia is not competent to become a state
witness)

12 August 1998 – Rusia testified before the trial court how (presented by the prosecution)

20 August 1998 – cross-examination was terminated due to the attempt bribe and due to his
deteriorating health .

Accused’s witnesses – testified on 3 september up to 24 september, 1998, the crosss-

examination was deferred

Other witnesses presented by the prosecution who gave details when pieced together were
related well to Rusia’s testimony from Ayala Center up to Carcar Cebu

DEFENSE CONTENTION

Larranaga – On 16 July 1997, taking his mid-term exam at the Center for Culinary Arts and in the
evening he was with his friends at the R &R Bar Restaurant. 15 witnesses testified to larranaga
thay they were either with larranga or aw him in QC at the time the crimes were committed.

4 airlines reps said plying the route of Manila Cebu-Manila presented proofs showing that the
name larranga does not appear in the list of pre-flight and post-flight from 15 July 1997 or
noontime of 17 July 1997

Uy Brothers – celebrating their father’s birthday in cebu.

Alberto and Ariel – brought white car Toyota an t the shop of soterol and left the vehicle and
promised to return the next morning

Josman – dizon said that they stayed at josman’s house drinking blue label and stayed up late.

The counsel of the accused moves to inhibit the Judge of the trial court but judge ocampo said
that there is no just and valid reasons, the counsel withdrew but they were contempt by the court
and imprisoned
26 AUGUST 1998 – accused filed their written consent to the withdrawal of their counsel and
moves to have several weeks to hire new counsel.

31 August 1998 – it was denied alleging that the proceeding could no longer delay the hearing of
the cases

2 September 1998 – PAO lawyers appointed by the court to become the counsel for the accused

24 September 1998 – new counsel for the accused enters their appearance and asked the prosec
witneeses be re-examined (COURT REFUSED) (Court order cross-examine start on 30 Sept 1998)

1 October 2018

RUSIA’S REITERATION

He has known Josman since 1991

He was invited because of the BIG HAPPENING on 16 July 1997,

The chiong sisters were at the waiting shed of ayala mall when the group of the accused

forced the chiong sisters to get in to the white car.

Went to the Jozman Aznar Group house in Guadalupe, Cebu, after that they headed to the south
bus terminal and able to find a van.

They drank and got pot session, Larranga and the other co-accused raped Marijoy while Rusia
and Josman raped Jacqueline

After the said rape, Rowen and Ariel led Marijoy to the cliff and mercilessly pushed her into the
ravine of Tan-awan, Carcar Cebu.

TRIAL COURT DECISION

Accused – guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two crimes of kidnapping and serious illegal
detention – PENALIZE by two reclusiones perpetua

ISSUE: W/ON COURT ERRED IN IGNORING AND VIOLATING DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF THE
ACCUSED

RULING:

SEC 14 (1) NO PERSON SHALL BE HELD TO ANSWER FOR A CRIMINAL OFFENSE WITHOUT DUE
PROCESS OF LAW.

RIGHTS – Right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation, to have a speedy trial, to meet the witnesses face to face and the production of
the evidence in his behalf
RIGHT TO COUNSEL

IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO APPOINT COUNSEL DE OFICIOTO REPRESENT
THE ACCUSED DURING THE REMAINING PHASES OF PROCEEDINGS.

The right of the accused to select own counsel must be exercised in a reasonable time and in a
reasonable manner - > 3 weeks is not reasonable ( can find counsel before the said weeks)

Counsel of the accused file for the inhibition of judge ocampo ( mockery of judicial process and
certainly delayed the hearing before the court)

RIGHT TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES

Accused alleged that they were not given sufficient opportunity to cross-examine Rusia, but
based on the records they did cross-examin rusia

It is the right and duty of the trial court to control the cross-examination of witnesses ( if it would
serve the ends of justice)

Heinous crime should be terminated within 60 days – larranga delay the proceeding because of
the transition of counsel.

The new counsel refused to examine larranaga – it is a waiver of right to confront and cross
examine the witnesses

RIGHT TO IMPARTIAL TRIAL

Accused alleged that when Judge Ocampo asked questions and made comments to the defense
witnesses were testifying – imputes bias

Note: Intervention of Judge was not only appropriate but necessary

RIGHT TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE

Larranga needs to prove that there is PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY that he cannot travel from Manila
to Cebu on 17 July 1997.

Larranga can be in cebu prior to the commission of the crime (did not produce ticket of his flight
as evidence to shoe the last time he went to Manila) to effect na nasa QC talaga siya.

SC: finds there is no violation of due process.

RUSIA IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE A STATE WITNESS

REQS FOR STATE WITNESS:

A. ACCUSED DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE MOST GUILTY

B. ACCUSED HAS NOT AT ANYTIME BE CONVICTED OF ANY OFFENSE INVOLVING MORAL
TURPITUDE

Accused said that rusia were charged of kidnapping and illegal detention and Russia admits that
he raped Jacqueline – SC does not mean that he is the most guilty
Rusia was convicted of burglary in Minesstosa – does not render his testimony inadmissible
The detailed supply by Rusia were such nature and quality that only a witness who actually saw
the commission of the crimes could furnish.

Unless: Rusia fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused – mababalik yung pagiging accused
niya.

PROSEC -> EVIDENCE OF THE DEFENSE

Larranaga fails to prove clear and convincing evidence that there is a physical impossibility to be
at the commission of the crime.

Logged book in condo (to prove he was in QC)

Secu guard testified that Larranga time 10:15 ( kaso nasa taas sya ng 10:05 and the ast entry is
10:05 and the next page 10:20) – DOUBTFUL as provided by the Trial Court

Surprisngly, the alleged arrival of larranga to the condo of his friend has no record in the logbook.

Rowena (teacher) alleged that larranga was at CCA in her class of applied math from 8am to
11:30am but larranga on his affidavit that he was taking exam from 8am to 3:30pm
(CONTRADICTING)

ACCUSED ARGUE – Prosecution failed to prove that the body found at the ravine in tan-awan
carcar was the body of marijoy – SC NOT CONVINCED (Finger print expert testified that the it
was matched on the fingerprints of marijoy)

SC AMENDS THE PENALTY IMPOSED TO THE ACCUSED

Where the person kidnapped is killed in the course of the detentions (regardless was purposely
sought or afterthought, the kidnapping and murder or homicide can no longer complexed) BUT
RATHER SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME

Dehumanization means deprivation of human qualities such as compassion

1.) Chiong sisters were handicuffed and their mouth were tape 2.) beaten to sever weakness
during detention, 3.) jacqueine forced to dance amidst lewness of the accused 4) Jacqueline
taunted to run 5.) Jacqueline still missing.

GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME (KIDNAPPING AND

SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION WITH HOMICIDE AND RAPE – MARIJOY

SAME BUT ONLY TO SIMPLE KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION – JACQUELINE

SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME – PROSECUTION MUST NECESSARYLY PROVE EACH OF THE

COMPOTENENT OFFENSES WITH THE SAME PRECISION WOULD BE NECESSARY IF THEY WERE
MADE THE SUBJECT OF SEPARATE COMPLAINTS.

WHEN THE VICTIM IS KILLED OR DIES AS A CONSEQUECNE OF DETENTION, OR IS RAPED, OR

SUBJECTED TO TORTURE OR DEHUNANIZING ACTS, THE MAXIMUM PENALTY SHALL BE
IMPOSED. (THERE SHOULD BE DIREDCT RELATION AND INTIMATE RELATION BETWEEN
KIDNAPPIND, KILLING AND RAPING MARIJOY)

SC – SENTENCED TO DEATH ( MAXIMUM PENALTY IMPOSED TO THE ACCUSED)

EXCEPT: james Anthony uy (minor at the time of the commission of the crime reclusion perp)