Practice question
A murder accused argues that R.A. No. 9346's prohibition of death means the court may discard every Rule 116, Section 3 safeguard and convict solely on his guilty plea. The prosecutor agrees. Under People v. Pagal, which is sound?
- The parties may eliminate all Section 3 protections by agreement
- The prohibition of death conclusively establishes guilt
- The statute requires dismissal of every murder case
- Pagal continued to apply Section 3's searching inquiry and prosecution-proof safeguards despite the prohibition on imposing death
- The court must impose death to preserve the safeguards
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html — Rule 116 §§1–8 (arraignment, pleas, searching inquiry, counsel); Rule 115 §1.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/sep2020/gr_241257_2020.html — People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020, EN BANC MAIN decision (Rule 116 §3; searching inquiry, prosecution evidence, and acquittal on the particular record).
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9346_2006.html — R.A. No. 9346 §§1–2 (death penalty prohibited; substitute penalties).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.