Criminal Law Assigned Cases
Insuperable or Lawful Cause
United States vs Isidro Vincentillo Facts of the case: The defendant, Isidro Vincentillo, was found guilty in the lower court of the crime of "illegal and arbitrary detention" of the complaining witness for a period of three days, and sentenced to pay a fine of 625 pesetas, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs of the trial. Issue: Was there lawful authority or cause on the part of Vicente Isisdro? Supreme Court Ruling: Under all the circumstances of this case, there can be no doubt of the lawful authority of the defendant, in the exercise of his functions as municipal president, to make arrest of the complaining witness which resulted in his alleged unlawful detention. It may be that the defendant was not friendly to the arrested man, and that he was not sorry to see him exposed to considerable inconvenience and delay in the proceedings incident to his trial, but there is nothing in this record upon which to base a finding that his defendant caused the arrest and the subsequent detention of the prisoner otherwise than in the due performance of his official duties; and there can be no doubt of his lawfully authority in the premises. The trial judge lays great stress upon the trivial nature of the offense for which the arrest was made, but keeping in mind the fact that there was no judicial officer in the remote community where the incident occurred at the time of the arrest, and no certainty of the early return of the absent justice of the peace, or his auxiliary, we are not prepared to hold, in the absence of all the evidence on this point that in a particular case of a defiance of local authority by the willful violation of a local ordinance, it was not necessary, or at least expedient, to make an arrest and send the offender forthwith to the justice of the peace of a neighboring municipality, if only to convince all would-be offenders that the forces of law and order were supreme, even in the absence of the local municipal judicial officers. Link: [Link]
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Mitigating Circumstances -Voluntary Surrender
People vs Magallanes Charges: Murder Facts of the Case: On September 29, 1991, at around three o'clock in the afternoon, the appellant, GREGORIO MAGALLANES, who war a "mananari" or gaffer of fighting cocks, trekked the road to the cockpit of Poblacion Sagbayan, Bohol. The appellant was in the company of several other cockfighting afficionados, among whom were Romualdo Cempron and Danilo Salpucial. While on their way, they passed by Virgilio Tapales who was drinking in the store of Umping Amores which was located on the elevated side of the road. Tapales hailed Cempron and invited him for a drink but the latter courteously refused as he was going to the cockpit. Tapales approached Cempron and conversed with him briefly. For some unknown reason, Tapales then directed his attention to the appellant who was walking a few steps behind Cempron. Tapales held the appellant by his shirt slapped him and strangled his neck. But seeing a knife tucked in Tapales' waist, the appellant pulled out the knife and slashed at Tapales to loosen his grip. The appellant succeeded in wounding the face and neck of Tapales who let go of the appellant and fled for his life. Insatiated, the appellant pursued Tapales and when the latter fell, the appellant stabbed him several more times before uttering the following words: "you are already dead in that case". With that, the appellant stood up and rode on the motorcycle being driven by Danilo Salpucial. Later, the appellant surrendered to the police authorities of the town of Inabanga, Bohol. The appellant expressed his willingness to enter a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of homicide with the mitigating circumstances of plea of guilty and voluntary surrender. Issue: Was the plea to the lesser homicide with mitigating circumstances of plea of guilty and voluntary surrender accepted? Supreme Court Ruling: Yes. Felix Estillore, a member of the Philippine National Police (PNP), and a witness for the prosecution had in fact testified that the appellant surrendered to the Police of Inabanga, Bohol after the stabbing incident. The fact that the appellant chose to surrender to the police authorities of Inabanga and not Sagbayan where the crime happened is not to be taken against him. He fled Sagbayan not to hide from the police
authorities but to evade retaliation from the relatives of the deceased. Besides, the law does not require that the perpetrator of an offense to be entitled to the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, must give himself up to the authorities in the municipality where the offense was committed. All that the law requires is for the offender to surrender to the authorities to save the government the trouble and the expense of looking for him in order to arrest him. WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is hereby MODIFIED by convicting the appellant Gregorio Magallanes of the crime of homicide only with the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty in his favor, and imposing upon him an indeterminate sentence of four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day ofprision correccional as minimum to ten (10) years of prision mayor as maximum. In all other respects, the judgment of the court a quo is AFFIRMED. Link: [Link]
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Personal Circumstance of Offender -Recidivism
People vs Baldera Charges: Robbery Facts of the Case: At about 4 a.m. on December 23, 1947, a Casa Manila bus loaded with passenger left Batangas, Batangas, bound for Manila. On the highway in barrio Calansayan, municipality of San Jose, same province, it was held up by a group of five or six armed men. One of these, later identified as herein appellant Pedro Baldera, who was then armed with a .45 caliber pistol, fired a shot, and this was followed by a hail of bullets coming from different directions. As a result, several passengers, among them Jose Cabrera, Jose Pastor and Francisco Mendoza, were wounded. After the firing had ceased, appellant got on the bus and, threatening the passengers with his gun, took P90 from Jose Pastor and P34 from Ponciana Villena. Another passenger named Francisco Mendoza was also relieved of his P3. Appellant then alighted and ordered the bus to proceed, whereupon the driver headed for the municipal building of San Jose and there reported the incident to the authorities. The wounded were taken to the hospital, where Jose Cabrera died from his wounds on the following day. Jose Pastor, who was wounded in the left leg, was cured in two months, while Francisco Mendoza's gunshot wound in the right shoulder healed in 15 days. For the above crime four persons were prosecuted and tried under an information charging "robo en cuadrilla con homicidio y lesiones graves y lesiones menos graves." The case was dismissed as to two of the accused due to insufficiency of evidence. But the other two, Pedro Baldera and Miguel Blay, were, after trial, found guilty as charged and sentenced, the first to capital punishment, and the second to life imprisonment, both to pay the corresponding indemnity and proportionate costs. Supreme Court Ruling: The lower court did, however, err in appreciating against the accused the circumstance of recidivism by reason of his previous conviction for theft, it appearing that crime was committed on or about December 30, 1947 (Exhibit E) while the offense now charged took place seven days before that date. In conclusion, we find appellant guilty of the crime of robbery with homicide and serious and less serious physical injuries with two aggravating circumstances. But there being no sufficient vote to impose the extreme penalty, appellant can be sentenced to life imprisonment only.
Wherefore, reducing appellant's sentence to life imprisonment but increasing the indemnity to be paid by him to the heirs of the deceased Jose Cabrera to P6,000, the judgement below as so modified is affirmed, with costs against the appellant. Nota Bene: I dont understand this case Link: [Link]
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
