G.R. No. 49121; September 29, 1944
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CONRADO DE MESA Y RACI, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The defendant-appellant, Conrado de Mesa y Raci, pleaded guilty to an information captioned as charging the crime of “murder.” The body of the information alleged that on or about October 7, 1943, in Manila, the accused, with evident premeditation and treachery and by taking advantage of nighttime, attacked and assaulted Mateo Alvarez, a duly qualified member of the Metropolitan Constabulary, while Alvarez was on patrol duty. The accused shot Alvarez from behind with a .45 caliber pistol, inflicting fatal wounds. The trial court, accepting the plea of guilty, sentenced the appellant to reclusión perpetua and ordered him to indemnify the heirs of the deceased.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly apprehended the crime charged and properly accepted the appellant’s plea of guilty, given the discrepancy between the caption of the information (“murder”) and the allegations in its body.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court set aside the sentence and remanded the case for new arraignment and trial. The Court agreed with the Solicitor General’s observation that the crime actually charged in the body of the information was not simple murder but the complex crime of murder with assault upon an agent of authority, for which the penalty provided by law is death. The caption of the information, which described the offense as “murder,” was misleading. This discrepancy created a possibility that the accused did not fully understand the gravity of the offense and the corresponding capital penalty when he entered his plea of guilty. Following the precedent in U.S. vs. Agcaoili, the trial court should have explained the true nature and penalty of the charged offense to the accused and should have taken evidence to determine the extent of his guilt before accepting the plea. The case was remanded to ensure the accused is properly arraigned and tried.