Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 215 views

    People v. Ringor

    Uploaded by

    Martha Sabayle
    Ringor was found guilty of murdering Florida, a restaurant cook, by shooting him six times with an unlicensed firearm in June 1994. At the time of the crime, using an unlicensed firearm was not an aggravating circumstance for murder. Ringor argued that a new law, RA 8294, passed in July 1997 that made using an unlicensed firearm an aggravating circumstance should apply to his case. However, the court ruled that applying RA 8294 retroactively would be an ex post facto law since it would impose a harsher penalty after the crime was committed. Therefore, RA 8294 did not apply to Ringor's case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Ringor

    Uploaded by

    Martha Sabayle
    215 views2 pages
    Ringor was found guilty of murdering Florida, a restaurant cook, by shooting him six times with an unlicensed firearm in June 1994. At the time of the crime, using an unlicensed firearm was not an aggravating circumstance for murder. Ringor argued that a new law, RA 8294, passed in July 1997 that made using an unlicensed firearm an aggravating circumstance should apply to his case. However, the court ruled that applying RA 8294 retroactively would be an ex post facto law since it would impose a harsher penalty after the crime was committed. Therefore, RA 8294 did not apply to Ringor's case.

    Original Description:

    CRIMLAW CASE

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Ringor was found guilty of murdering Florida, a restaurant cook, by shooting him six times with an unlicensed firearm in June 1994. At the time of the crime, using an unlicensed firearm was not an aggravating circumstance for murder. Ringor argued that a new law, RA 8294, passed in July 1997 that made using an unlicensed firearm an aggravating circumstance should apply to his case. However, the court ruled that applying RA 8294 retroactively would be an ex post facto law since it would impose a harsher penalty after the crime was committed. Therefore, RA 8294 did not apply to Ringor's case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    215 views2 pages

    People v. Ringor

    Uploaded by

    Martha Sabayle
    Ringor was found guilty of murdering Florida, a restaurant cook, by shooting him six times with an unlicensed firearm in June 1994. At the time of the crime, using an unlicensed firearm was not an aggravating circumstance for murder. Ringor argued that a new law, RA 8294, passed in July 1997 that made using an unlicensed firearm an aggravating circumstance should apply to his case. However, the court ruled that applying RA 8294 retroactively would be an ex post facto law since it would impose a harsher penalty after the crime was committed. Therefore, RA 8294 did not apply to Ringor's case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Title: People v.

    Ringor Name of Digester: Sabayle

    G.R. No 123918 Date: December 9, 1999 Ponente: Purisima, J

    Subject / Syllabus Topic: Prospectivity

    Petitioner: People of the Philippines Respondent: Augusto


    Loreto Ringor, Jr.
    Doctrine (if applicable):

    Recit Summary:

    Facts:
    On June 23, 1994 at around 6:00 in the evening, Fely Batanes, a waitress at the People’s
    Restaurant, saw Ringor and his two companions enter the restaurant. After seating themselves,
    they ordered a bottle of gin. Minutes later, appellant approached one of the tables where Florida,
    the restaurant’s cook, was drinking beer. Without any warning, Ringor pulled Florida’s hair and
    poked a knife on the latter’s throat. Florida stood up and pleaded not to harm him. Thereafter,
    they left the restaurant but went back holding a gun, entered the kitchen of the restaurant,
    stealthily approached Florida from behind and fired six successive shots at Florida which caused
    his death. Ringor was then arrested and caught in his possession was an unlicensed firearm. He
    admitted shooting the victim but theorized that he acted in self-defense. However, the appellant
    failed to prove the element of unlawful aggression. Prosecution witness Fely Batanes was firm in
    her declaration that the victim was in the kitchen unarmed when Ringor shot him. The victim
    had no bolo as what Ringor was claiming and likewise, he was not manifesting any aggressive act
    which could have imperiled Ringor’s safety and well-being. Thus, Ringor was found guilty of
    murder and was sentenced to death. He was also found guilty of a separate charge of illegal
    possession of firearms with a sentence of 17 to 20 years.
    Issue/s: Ruling:
    Is RA 8294 (which took effect on July 6, 1997) applicable to the No.
    accused (crime occurred on June 23, 1994)?
    Holding:
    At the time of the commission of the crime, the use of an unlicensed firearm in taking the life of
    another was not yet an aggravating circumstance in homicide or murder. If this will be applied,
    the penalty of death will be imposed to Ringor. Thus, RA 8294 cannot be applied as it is
    unfavorable to the accused, lest it becomes an ex post facto law.
    Separate Opinions:

    Notes:
    RA 8294 - AN ACT AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO.
    1866, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED “CODIFYING THE LAWS ON
    ILLEGAL/UNLAWFUL POSSESSION, MANUFACTURE, DEALING IN, ACQUISITION
    OR DISPOSITION OF FIREARMS, AMMUNITION OR EXPLOSIVES OR
    INSTRUMENTS USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF FIREARMS, AMMUNITION OR
    EXPLOSIVES, AND IMPOSING STIFFER PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN VIOLATIONS
    THEREOF, AND FOR RELEVANT PURPOSES”

    You might also like