Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1904 > February 1904 Decisions > G.R. No. 1493 February 25, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. BERNARDO USIS, ET AL.

003 Phil 373:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 1493. February 25, 1904. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. BERNARDO USIS ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Felipe G. Calderon, for Appellants.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; BRIGANDAGE; EVIDENCE; PURPOSE OF BAND. — In prosecution under the provisions of Act No. 518, defining and punishing brigandage, the evidence should show the purpose for which the band was organized. It is not necessary to make this proof by direct testimony; this may be shown by circumstances, but there must be something in the case from which the inference can properly be deduced.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID. — Cases of United States v. Francisco Decusin (1 Off. Gaz., 730) and United States v. Saturnino de la Cruz (1 Off. Gaz., 664) cited and approved.


D E C I S I O N


COOPER, J. :


Bernardo Usis, Marcelino Mangubat, Aquilino Cantada, Luis Taganas, and Mateo Ronquillo are charged with th e offense of bandolerismo and were convicted in the Court of First Instance of Cavite on the 28th day of August, 1903, as forming a party of bandits defined in Act No. 518 of the Civil Commission, and were condemned to the penalty of twenty years’ imprisonment and to pay the costs of proceedings. The defendants have appealed to this court.

From the testimony it appears that in the month of May, 1903, in the barrio of Iba, Silang, in the Province of Cavite, the accused were arrested by a body of Insular police; that at the time of their arrest they were in company with one Aguedo, and, meeting about a dozen of the Constabulary, Aguedo, who was called the chief of the gang, fired his revolver at the Constabulary and succeeded in making his escape; the defendants were captured and four of them were found armed with bolos and one with a Mauser bayonet.

According to the statement of witnesses on the part of the prosecution, upon their capture the defendants stated that they were in search of a carabao which had been lost, the property of one of their number, Mangubat, and that Aguedo was the chief of the band.

The defendants testified in their own behalf, some of them declaring that the lost carabao belonged to Marcelino Mangubat and others that the lost carabao was the property of Aquilino Cantada. Their statements were contradictory, both with respect to the places of their residence, the arms which they bore on that occasion, the manner in which they were assembled, and other minor details, which induced the court below, in connection with the other evidence, to believe that they formed a band of robbers and that they were guilty under the provisions of Act No. 518.

In order to sustain a conviction under the provisions of this Act, it must appear that the parties charged with the offense formed a band of robbers for the purpose of stealing carabaos or other personal property by the means of force and violence and went out upon the highway or roamed over the country armed with deadly weapons for this purpose.

To prove this crime it is unnecessary to adduce evidence that any member of the band has in fact committed robbery or theft, but it is sufficient to justify a conviction if from the circumstances it can be inferred beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was a member of such armed band as that described in the said act.

There is no proof in the case to show the purposes for which the band was organized or that any robbery or theft had been committed by the band. It is not necessary to make this proof by direct testimony. The purposes for which they were organized may be inferred from circumstances showing their purposes, but there must be something in the case from which the inference can properly de deduced (United States v. Francisco Decusin, 1 Off. Gaz., 730; 1 United States v. Saturnino de la Cruz, 1 Off. Gaz., 664. 2)

On account of the insufficiency of proof in this respect the judgment of the Court of First Instance must be reversed and defendants acquitted.

It is so ordered and directed and costs are adjudged de oficio.

Arellano, C.J., Mapa and McDonough, JJ., concur.

Separate Opinions


TORRES and WILLARD, JJ., concurring:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

We concur in the acquittal of the defendants because of the lack of proof of the perpetration of the crime of brigandage.

JOHNSON, J., concurring:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

I agree with Mr. Justice Cooper in his finding of facts and in his conclusions in this case of the United States v. Usis Et. Al.

In my opinion the doctrine announced by this court in the cause of the United States v. Francisco Decusin has been overruled.

Endnotes:



1. 2 Phil. Rep., 536.

2. 2 Phil. Rep., 431.




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






February-1904 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. Nos. 1561 & 1562 February 2, 1904 - RAFAEL ENRIQUEZ v. A. S. WATSON & CO. ET AL.

    003 Phil 279

  • G.R. No. 1300 February 3, 1904 - E. C. McCULLOUGH v. R. AENLLE & Co.

    003 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. 1444 February 4, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. SEVERO ALCANTARA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 309

  • G.R. No. 1693 February 5, 1904 - FRANCISCO GARCIA v. JOHN C. SWEENEY

    004 Phil 751

  • G.R. No. 1464 February 11, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MAXIMO OANGOANG, ET AL.

    003 Phil 312

  • G.R. No. 1522 February 11, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. POLICARPO IDICA

    003 Phil 313

  • G.R. No. 1548 February 11, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. PAULINO GARCIA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 317

  • G.R. No. 1368 February 12, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. FRED FREIMUTH

    003 Phil 318

  • G.R. No. 1399 February 12, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. NORBERTO OBREGON

    003 Phil 320

  • G.R. No. 1513 February 12, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. CASIANO SADIAN

    003 Phil 323

  • G.R. No. 1437 February 13, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. AGATON AMBATA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. 1460 February 16, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MAXIMO GUILLERMO

    003 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 1478 February 16, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    003 Phil 331

  • G.R. No. 1480 February 16, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    003 Phil 332

  • G.R. No. 1509 February 16, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS GLORIA

    003 Phil 333

  • G.R. No. 1446 February 17, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. AMBROSIO DE LA CRUZ

    003 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. 1481 February 17, 1903

    UNITED STATES v. LIBERATO EXALTACION, ET AL.

    003 Phil 339

  • G.R. No. 1092 February 18, 1904 - LUIS QUERIDO v. RAMON FLORENDO, ET AL.

    003 Phil 342

  • G.R. No. 1372 February 20, 1903

    JOHN E. SPRINGER v. ARTHUR F. ODLIN

    003 Phil 344

  • G.R. No. 1434 February 23, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO DE LOS REYES

    003 Phil 349

  • G.R. No. 1532 February 23, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. CASIMIRO GASAL

    003 Phil 354

  • G.R. No. 1705 February 23, 1904 - TOMAS BLANCO v. BYRON S. AMBLER

    003 Phil 358

  • G.R. No. 1293 February 23, 1904 - ILDELFONSO DORONILA v. JOSE LOPEZ

    003 Phil 360

  • G.R. No. 1498 February 24, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MARTIN CABUENAS

    003 Phil 366

  • G.R. No. 1493 February 25, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. BERNARDO USIS, ET AL.

    003 Phil 373

  • G.R. No. 1506 February 26, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. FACUNDO PINEDA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 376

  • G.R. No. 1482 February 29, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO FERNANDEZ

    003 Phil 380