This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2001-10-08 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| The Court observes that the manner by which the trial court, during the re-arraignment, conducted the inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the accused-appellant's plea of guilty leaves much to be desired.[33] The trial court did not impress on the accused the full comprehension of the consequences of his plea of guilty.[34] Rule 116, Section 3 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure is explicit: "Section 3. Plea of guilty to capital offense, reception of evidence.- When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the courts shall conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of his plea and require the prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of culpability. The accused may also present evidence in his behalf." | |||||