Professional Documents
Culture Documents
People Vs Mamaruncas
People Vs Mamaruncas
25, 2012
Del Castillo, J.
Facts: Baudelio Batoon, Richard Batoon, Juanito Gepayo and a certain “Nito” were
working on vehicles inside the auto repair shop. Baginda Palao then entered the shop
accompanied by appellants Renandang Mamaruncas and Pendatum Ampuan. Baginda
Palao showed Baudelio Batoon an arrest warrant and told the latter he was serving it
against Batoon. The arrival of Baginda’s group prompted Juanito Gepayo and Richard
Batoon to stop their work and observe what was happening. Baudelio Batoon told
Baginda to just wait awhile, as they would settle the matter after he finishes tuning-up
an engine he had been working on. Baginda reacted by slapping the victim’s stomach
and pointing a .45 caliber pistol at him. Baudelio then tried to grab Baginda’s gun,
causing the two of them to grapple for the same. Mamaruncas shot Baudelio’s right
thigh with a .38 cal. homemade gun. Pendatum Ampuan, who was also standing behind
Baudelio, followed up by shooting the victim’s left arm pit with a .45 cal. pistol. Baudelio
fell to the ground and Baginda finished [him off] with a shot to the back. Juanito
Gepayo and Richard Batoon saw the entire scene, stunned and unable to do anything.
From their vantage points three (3) to four (4) meters away, these witnesses had a clear
and unobstructed view of the entire incident. The accused were convicted but they
appealed with the assignment of error on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses.
Ruling: No more. It is deemed waived. Apellants aver that the Information filed before
the trial court was substantially defective considering that it accuses Abdul and Ampuan
as one and the same person when in fact they were identified as different persons. As
such, Ampuan was not able to comprehend the Information read to him.
The Court cannot accord merit to this argument. It is well to note that appellants failed
to raise the issue of the defective Information before the trial court through a motion
for bill of particulars or a motion to quash the information. Their failure to object to
the alleged defect before entering their pleas of not guilty amounted to a waiver of the
defect in the Information.