ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 132069. February 16, 2004]

PEOPLE vs. OBOSA

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 16 2004 .

G.R. No. 132069 (People of the Philippines vs. Jose T. Obosa.)

For consideration is the Letter dated 27 October 2003 of Alfredo C. Benitez ("Benitez"), Acting Chief, Administrative Division, Bureau of Corrections. Benitez seeks clarification on whether the Decision dated 31 May 2000 ("Decision") rendered in this case "imposed xxx a single reclusion perpetua or xxx two reclusion perpetua[s]."

The dispositive portion of the Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the appellate court is affirmed in toto . The appellant Jose Obosa y Tutana is hereby found guilty of two counts of murder for the death of Secretary Jaime N. Ferrer and Jesus Calderon and is sentenced to reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of the victims the sum of fifty thousand pesos each and to pay the cost of the suit.

We explained appellant's culpability and the penalty applicable to the crimes committed by him, thus:

[T]he conclusion of the appellate court that the crimes committed were qualified by treachery and that the appellant should be held guilty of two counts of murder instead of homicide is well-founded. The appellate court correctly observed:

"It is not disputed that Secretary Ferrer and his driver Jesus Calderon were waylid while they were in the Secretary's car passing through Victor Medina street (RTC Decision, p. 737, Vol II Records). The ambush was carried out precisely while the Secretary's car was slowing down as they were approaching the corner of Victor Medina street and Quirino Avenue ensuring the accomplishment of the attack and at the same time eliminating any risk from possible defenses that the victim[s] may put up. The victims who were then seated inside the car were in no position to escape nor offer any form of defense. They were, at that point, helpless prey. Hence, accused-appellant Obosa should be found guilty not only of two counts of homicide but of two counts of murder defined and penalized in Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code. There being no other aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, the penalty should be imposed in its medium period, which is the indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua."

Xxx

The crime was committed after the effectivity of the 1987 Constitution and during the suspension of the imposition of the death penalty. Under Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code the penalty for murder is reclusion temporal maximum to death. Conformably with People vs. Mu�oz and subsequent cases, the penalty should be imposed in its medium period which is reclusion perpetua.

The Decision became final on 5 July 2000.

It is clear from the Decision that we found appellant guilty of two counts of murder and, under the circumstances obtaining in the case, the penalty we imposed for each count was reclusion perpetua. Insofar as the dispositive of the Decision failed to specify such penalty, the same should be amended accordingly. Where there is ambiguity caused by an omission or mistake in the dispositive portion of a decision the court may clarify such ambiguity by an amendment even after the judgment had become final (Filipino Legion Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 155 Phil. 616 [1974]).

WHEREFORE, the dispositive portion of the Decision, dated 31 May 2000, is amended as follows:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the appellate court is affirmed in toto. The appellant Jose Obosa y Tutana is hereby found guilty of two counts of murder for the death of Secretary Jaime N. Ferrer and Jesus Calderon and is sentenced to reclusion perpetua for each count and to indemnify the heirs of the victims the sum of fifty thousand pesos each and to pay the cost of the suit.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA ESGUERRA-VIDAL
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE