ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1904 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1491 March 5, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO ARCEO, ET AL.

    003 Phil 381

  • G.R. No. 1388 March 5, 1904 - SILVERIO PAGUIA FERNANDO v. PACIFICO SANTOS VILLALON, ET AL.

    003 Phil 386

  • G.R. No. 972 March 14, 1904 - JOSE V. L. GONZAGA v. CARMEN F. DE CAÑETE

    003 Phil 394

  • G.R. No. 1468 March 14, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. ALONSO P. GARDNER

    003 Phil 398

  • G.R. No. 1057 March 15, 1904 - ANTONIO DOMENECH v. ANASTASIO MONTES

    003 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 1581 March 15, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO GIT

    003 Phil 414

  • G.R. No. 1445 March 17, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO FELICIANO, ET AL.

    003 Phil 422

  • G.R. No. 1403 March 19, 1904 - JOSE E. ALEMANY ET AL. v. JOHN C. SWEENEY

    003 Phil 424

  • G.R. No. 1439 March 19, 1904 - ANTONIO CASTANEDA v. JOSE E. ALEMANY

    003 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. 1476 March 19, 1904 - MAGDALENA CANCINO, ET AL. v. GERVASIO VALDEZ, ET AL.

    003 Phil 429

  • G.R. No. 1543 March 19, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO VEGARA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 432

  • G.R. No. 1176 March 21, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. PLACIDO ESPIRIDION, ET AL.

    003 Phil 435

  • G.R. No. 1560 March 21, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. BERNABE GOMEZ

    003 Phil 436

  • G.R. No. 1245 March 21, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. CASIANO SAADLUCAP

    003 Phil 437

  • G.R. No. 1353 March 22, 1904 - ANA MARIA ALCANTARA v. MIGUEL MONTENEGRO

    003 Phil 440

  • G.R. No. 1550 March 24, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. JULIO POLOSAN

    003 Phil 443

  • G.R. No. 1315 March 24, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. EUSEBIO VERSOSA

    003 Phil 444

  • G.R. No. 1575 March 24, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. LAUREANO MIJARES, ET AL.

    003 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. 1395 March 28, 1904 - JUANA BRAGA v. JOSE MILLORA

    003 Phil 458

  • G.R. No. 1297 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. JULIO MENDOZA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 468

  • G.R. No. 1582 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. DALMACIO LAGNASON

    003 Phil 472

  • G.R. No. 1330 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. ARTURO BALDELLO, ET AL.

    003 Phil 508

  • G.R. No. 1601 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS MACLEOD

    003 Phil 510

  • G.R. No. 1660 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIA HERRERA, ET AL.

    003 Phil 515

  • G.R. No. 1655 March 29, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. LEON DE LA TORRE

    003 Phil 516

  • G.R. No. 1670 March 29, 1904 - RAMONA TRINIDAD v. EDUARDO JARABE

    003 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. 1133 March 29, 1904 - RAFAEL REYES, ET AL. v. COMPAÑIA MARITIMA

    003 Phil 519

  • G.R. No. 1413 March 30, 1904 - ANDRES VALENTON ET AL. v. MANUEL MURCIANO

    003 Phil 537

  • G.R. No. 1072 March 30, 1904 - MANUEL ABELLO v. PAZ KOCK DE MONASTERIO

    003 Phil 558

  • G.R. No. 1438 March 30, 1904 - PETRONILA SALONGA v. MANUEL CONCEPCION

    003 Phil 563

  • G.R. No. 1432 March 30, 1904 - MANUEL ARAULLO, ET AL. v. SALUSTIANO ARAULLO, ET AL.

    003 Phil 567

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. 1445   March 17, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO FELICIANO, ET AL. <br /><br />003 Phil 422

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. 1445. March 17, 1904. ]

    THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. MARIANO FELICIANO ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

    Lucio Villareal, for Appellants.

    Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CRIMINAL LAW; ROBBERY EN CUADRILLA; BRIGANDAGE. — When it appears that the defendants were inhabitants of the town in which the robbery was committed, and there is no evidence of any agreement between them other than to commit the particular crime in question, the offense committed is robbery en cuadrilla under the Penal Code and not that of brigandage under Act No. 518.

    The defendants were prosecuted upon the following information filed by the fiscal of the Province of Rizal:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "The undersigned charges Mariano Feliciano, Esperidion Tolentino, Eduardo Pascual, Pablo San Jose, and Doroteo Jose (alias Mateo Tucmot) of the crime of robbery en cuadrilla, committed as follows: On the night of May 25, 1903, the accused, together with several other persons, some of them disguised as members of the insular police, being more than three in number and all armed with guns, revolvers, and knives, assaulted the shop of the Chinamen Oa-Chio and Si-Cuingco, situated in the town of Cardona of this Province of Rizal, Philippine Islands, and for the purpose of gain and by employing intimidation and force, took the money and jewels which were in the said store; this against the statute in the case made and provided."cralaw virtua1aw library

    The trial court convicted the defendants of the crime charged, with the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity, and sentenced each of them to ten years of presidio mayor. Against this decision they appealed.


    D E C I S I O N


    ARELLANO, C.J. :


    The facts proved are that the five defendants, at 11 o’clock at night, May 25, 1903, assaulted the store of some Chinamen in the town of Cardona, Rizal, the defendants Feliciano and Tolentino being armed with revolvers and the other three with bolos, and that they robbed the store of 248 pesos and other valuable property.

    The five defendants are known to be inhabitants of the town in which the robbery was committed, and did not constitute known band of brigands. There was no agreement between them other than that reached for the particular purpose of committing the crime of robbery in the store of the Chinamen. They were all seen in the town on the day following the robbery. Consequently they are guilty of robbery en cuadrilla, within the meaning of the term as defined by article 505 of the Penal Code, and are liable to the penalty prescribed by article 504 in connection with paragraph 5 of article 503. There was no error in the finding of the court below that the offense was committed with the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity.

    We therefore affirm the judgment affirm the judgment appealed by which the defendants were sentenced to ten years of presidio mayor and to the payment of the costs in equal parts, and impose upon them the additional obligation of the return of the money and property robbed, with the consequent accessory penalties, with the payment of the costs of this instance in the same proportion.

    Cooper, Mapa and McDonough, JJ., concur.

    Separate Opinions


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

    We are of the opinion that the crime should be classed as brigandage and the defendants convicted in accordance with the provisions of section 1 Act No. 518, for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in the case of the United States v. Francisco Decusin, 1 1 Official Gazette, No. 57, published October 7, 1903. See also the decision in the case of the United States v. Pedro Maano Et. Al., 2 Official Gazette, No. 3, published January 20, 1904. 2

    Endnotes:



    1. 2 Phil. Rep., 536.

    2. 2 Phil. Rep., 718.

    G.R. No. 1445   March 17, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO FELICIANO, ET AL. <br /><br />003 Phil 422




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED