July 1903 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1903 > July 1903 Decisions >
G.R. No. 1259 July 24, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. DOMINGO BERRY
002 Phil 352:
002 Phil 352:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 1259. July 24, 1903. ]
THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. DOMINGO BERRY, Defendant-Appellant.
Federico Olbes for Appellant.
Solicitor-General Araneta for Appellee.
SYLLABUS
1. AMNESTY; HOMICIDE; SPIES; SUPERIOR ORDERS. --In a prosecution for homicide in which the evidence shows that the defendant, while participating against the United States in the insurrection, in December, 1900, killed the deceased in the belief that he was a spy of the Americans, the defendant’s superior having ordered him to kill all such spies: Held, That the defendant is included in the amnesty of July 4, 1902.
D E C I S I O N
WILLARD, J. :
The Solicitor-General and the attorney for the defendant have joined in a petition that the defendant be included in the amnesty of July 4, 1902.
There is evidence in the case that the defendant was participating against the United States in the insurrection in December, 1900, when the crime was committed; that he had been ordered by his chief to kill all spies of the Americans; that he believed that the deceased was such a spy and that the defendant killed him for that reason. If this evidence can be believed the petition should be granted. Although the evidence is conflicting and is not entirely satisfactory, we have decided that it is more probable than otherwise that the story of the defendant is substantially true. The petition is accordingly granted and, on filing in this court the oath required by the proclamation, an order will be entered dismissing the case. It is so ordered.
Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Mapa and McDonough, JJ., concur.
There is evidence in the case that the defendant was participating against the United States in the insurrection in December, 1900, when the crime was committed; that he had been ordered by his chief to kill all spies of the Americans; that he believed that the deceased was such a spy and that the defendant killed him for that reason. If this evidence can be believed the petition should be granted. Although the evidence is conflicting and is not entirely satisfactory, we have decided that it is more probable than otherwise that the story of the defendant is substantially true. The petition is accordingly granted and, on filing in this court the oath required by the proclamation, an order will be entered dismissing the case. It is so ordered.
Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Mapa and McDonough, JJ., concur.
