Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1902 > April 1902 Decisions > G.R. No. 104 April 22, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. ALEJANDRO VALDEZ, ET AL.

001 Phil 238:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 104. April 22, 1902. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. ALEJANDRO VALDEZ, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Jose Altavas, for Appellants.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; HOMICIDE; BURDEN OF PROOF. — The uncorroborated testimony of the accused that the deceased was killed by another while bound is not sufficient to establish that the deceased was bound when killed by the accused.


D E C I S I O N


MAPA, J. :


Valdez’s codefendants having been acquitted in the court below, this case has been brought before us on appeal by the said defendant against the judgment of the Court of First Instance, by which he was condemned as principal of the crime of homicide committed on the person of Martin Evangelista to fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal and the accessories, to the payment of 700 pesos to the heirs of the deceased, and to the payment of an eighth part of the costs of the prosecution.

The guilt of the defendant Valdez is fully proven in the record. The judge below acted correctly, in our opinion, in classifying the facts in the case as constituting the crime of homicide. The evidence is insufficient to show that any of the specific circumstances established by article 403 as constitutive of the crime of murder were present in the commission of the crime.

It is true that the defendant testified that Martin Evangelista was killed by one Venancio Cariaga while bound elbow to elbow. This testimony is the only evidence in the record upon this point. If this circumstance were true it would be unquestionable that the crime was committed treacherously (con alevosia), and should therefore be classified as homicide, as urged by counsel for the Government in this instance; but we can not admit the testimony of Valdez as true in any degree, not even in so far as it might be prejudicial to him, by reason of the fact that he gave this testimony for the sole and exclusive purpose of incriminating another to exculpate himself, evidently falsely stating the facts and circumstances in such a manner that it would be unwise, in our judgment, to accept any of his testimony as the foundation of a decision. We are of the opinion that it was his purpose to entirely disregard the truth, his sole purpose being to incriminate another. For these reasons this testimony can not properly be considered a confession of the defendant, but should be regarded as testimony given for the purpose of injuring a third person. Consequently it should be accepted only in so far as it is corroborated by other data in the record.

We therefore decide that the judgment appealed should be affirmed, with the costs of this instance to the Appellant.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Willard and Ladd, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






April-1902 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 534 April 1, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. CUSTODIO PAYOG ET AL.

    001 Phil 185

  • G.R. No. 521 April 1, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO DE LEON ET AL.

    001 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 542 April 1, 1902 - JOSE GONZAGA v. CARMEN CAÑETE

    001 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. 539 April 1, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN RAMOS ET AL.

    001 Phil 192

  • G.R. No. 488 April 5, 1902 - GREGORIA MARTINEZ v. HOLLIDAY

    001 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 505 April 8, 1902 - FRANCISCO GUTIERREZ REPIDE v. MARTIN ASTUAR, ET AL.

    002 Phil 757

  • G.R. No. 108 April 8, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN ESCOBAR

    001 Phil 200

  • G.R. No. 537 April 9, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. HIPOLITO HILARIO ET AL.

    001 Phil 202

  • G.R. No. 441 April 9, 1902 - UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. MATEO PEREZ

    001 Phil 203

  • G.R. No. 238 April 12, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. LEON BALLESTEROS

    001 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 427 April 15, 1902 - CO-TIONGCO v. CO-GUIA

    001 Phil 210

  • G.R. No. 597 April 15, 1902 - JUANA MORENO FRANCISCO v. JOSE MANUEL GRUET

    001 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 530 April 16, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. BERNABE SANTOS

    001 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 567 April 16, 1902 - PIO ESPIRITU v. MARIANO DESEO

    001 Phil 225

  • G.R. No. 544 April 19, 1902 - EDWIN H. WARNER v. MUNICIPALITY OF PASAY

    001 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 555 April 19, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. PANTALEON GIMENO

    001 Phil 236

  • G.R. No. 104 April 22, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. ALEJANDRO VALDEZ, ET AL.

    001 Phil 238

  • G.R. No. 411 April 23, 1902 - DONALDSON v. SMITH

    002 Phil 766

  • G.R. No. 113 April 24, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. SAMARIN

    001 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. 408 April 24, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO ENRIQUEZ

    001 Phil 241

  • G.R. No. 472 March 28, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE REYES

    001 Phil 249

  • G.R. No. 852 April 28, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. PATRICIO ANTONIO

    001 Phil 251

  • G.R. No. 524 April 29, 1902 - RAMON MORTERA v. LI CHING-TING ET AL.

    001 Phil 253

  • G.R. No. 428 April 30, 1902 - JOSE ZULUETA v. FRANCISCA ZULUETA

    001 Phil 254

  • G.R. No. 452 April 30, 1902 - GAUDENCIO SIMPAO v. JOAQUIN DIZON

    001 Phil 261

  • G.R. No. 568 April 30, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO CABE ET AL.

    001 Phil 265

  • G.R. No. 586 April 30, 1902 - MARTINIANO VELOSO, ET AL. v. BENITA PACHECO

    001 Phil 271