Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • SDF

    Uploaded by

    Ethan Kurby
    114 views1 page
    Petitioner was convicted as an accessory to murder for his involvement in the killing of Mamerto Victosa. Victosa was in police custody when he was shot and killed by SPO1 Isagani Torrefranca. Although petitioner was Torrefranca's superior, he failed to arrest Torrefranca after the shooting or report the incident, instead agreeing to flee the scene with Torrefranca and later instructing another officer not to tell anyone what happened. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that petitioner had a duty to disarm and arrest Torrefranca at the scene but instead helped him escape, making petitioner liable as an accessory to murder.

    Original Description:

    ds

    Original Title

    sdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Petitioner was convicted as an accessory to murder for his involvement in the killing of Mamerto Victosa. Victosa was in police custody when he was shot and killed by SPO1 Isagani Torrefranca. Although petitioner was Torrefranca's superior, he failed to arrest Torrefranca after the shooting or report the incident, instead agreeing to flee the scene with Torrefranca and later instructing another officer not to tell anyone what happened. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that petitioner had a duty to disarm and arrest Torrefranca at the scene but instead helped him escape, making petitioner liable as an accessory to murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    114 views1 page

    SDF

    Uploaded by

    Ethan Kurby
    Petitioner was convicted as an accessory to murder for his involvement in the killing of Mamerto Victosa. Victosa was in police custody when he was shot and killed by SPO1 Isagani Torrefranca. Although petitioner was Torrefranca's superior, he failed to arrest Torrefranca after the shooting or report the incident, instead agreeing to flee the scene with Torrefranca and later instructing another officer not to tell anyone what happened. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that petitioner had a duty to disarm and arrest Torrefranca at the scene but instead helped him escape, making petitioner liable as an accessory to murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    AVENGOZA vs.

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES


    G.R. No. 155046 June 26, 2006
    FACTS:
    The Sandiganbayan convicted Police Inspector Geraldo Benjamin Avengoza ("petitioner") as accessory
    in the crime of Murder.

    In the evening of June 5 1992, petitioner, SPO1 Isagani Torrefranca ("Torrefranca") and PO2 Diosdado
    Catacutan ("Catacutan") took into their custody Mamerto Victosa ("Victosa"), a detainee at Leon B. Postigo
    Police Station in Zamboanga Del Norte. Victosa was under investigation for the alleged theft of a .38 caliber
    revolver issued to Torrefranca. Petitioner, Torrefranca and Catacutan were supposed to bring Victosa to the
    PNP Police Station in Camp Hamac, Sicayab, Dipolog City where they were assigned. However, the following
    morning, Victosa was found dead with his hands tied behind his back and with three bullet wounds on his chest.
    Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration on the ground that Torrefranca never escaped. Hence, he
    could not have harbored, concealed or assisted in Torrefranca's escape that would make him liable as an
    accessory to the crime of Murder. In its August 14, 2002 Resolution, the Sandiganbayan denied petitioner's
    motion for lack of merit. Hence, the petition before this Court.
    ISSUE:
    Whether petitioner is liable as an accessory to the crime of Murder committed by Torrefranca.
    HELD:
    Yes. In this case, it cannot be denied that petitioner knew that Torrefranca shot Victosa. Catacutan
    testified that when he returned to the vehicle, he heard petitioner shouting at Torrefranca and asking him why
    he shot Victosa. Petitioner was Torrefranca's superior officer. The Court agrees with the Sandiganbayan that
    petitioner has the duty to disarm and arrest Torrefranca right at the scene of the crime. Yet, when Torrefranca
    said "Takbo na tayo" ("Let's run"), petitioner agreed with him. After Torrefranca said "Takbo na tayo," Catacutan
    asked petitioner what his order was. Petitioner just said "let's go." Even if petitioner believed Torrefranca's
    allegation that Victosa tried to escape, it is still petitioner's duty to report the incident upon their arrival at their
    headquarters. Instead, petitioner instructed Catacutan not to tell anyone what happened. Thus, the verdict of the
    Sandiganbayan was affirmed.

    You might also like