Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1904 > March 1904 Decisions > G.R. No. 1330 March 28, 1904 - UNITED STATES v. ARTURO BALDELLO, ET AL.

003 Phil 508:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 1330. March 28, 1904. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. ARTURO BALDELLO ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Lionel D. Hargis and Jose Santiago, for Appellants.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; REBELLION. — An armed attempt to overthrow the Government constitute the crime of rebellion.


D E C I S I O N


WILLARD, J. :


On April 14, 1903, a band of about twelve men, among whom were the defendants, armed with daggers and one revolver, led by th defendant Baldello and one Bonifacio, embarked in a passenger steamer at Manila for the town of Guagua in the Province of Pampanga. Having arrived at the town about 12 o’clock of the same day, they attacked the municipal building, overpowered the sentinel, a policeman, took from him his gun and revolver, overpowered the clerks in the offices, and seized four other guns and certain ammunition, which they obtained by breaking open the chest in which it was kept. They attacked and wounded another policeman and took his gun. On leaving the municipal building they marched through the streets, crying to the people to follow them and attack the Government. The people not only refused to join the party, but, with the policemen of the place, pursued them. A running fight was kept up for some distance, during which two of the party of the defendants were killed and one wounded and five of the pursuers were wounded. The pursuit ended with the capture of the defendants. That this band was part of an organization to overthrow the Government was fully proved. Among other articles seized when the defendants were taken was the seal of the defendant Baldello showing that he was a brigadier-general of the "Reborn Philippine Revolution."cralaw virtua1aw library

The case is, in all its essential points, the same as the case against Lagnaso, just decided, and is ruled by it. 1 The penalty of death imposed upon the defendants Baldello and Alcantara can not, therefore, in accordance with that decision stand. The judgment is reversed, and each one of the defendants is sentenced to ten years of imprisonment and a fine of $10,000, money of the United States, and to pay the costs of both instances.

Separate Opinions


ARELLANO, C.J., with whom concurs MAPA, J., concurring:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

I concur as to the penalty imposed in conformity with section 3 of Act No. 292 for the crime of rebellion.

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

For the reasons given by me in the case of United States v. Dalmacio Lagnason, I believe that the accused in this case are guilty of the crime of insurrection, defined and punished in section 3 of Act No. 292, in accordance with which they should be convicted and sentenced to ten years of imprisonment ad to pay a fine of $10,000, United States currency, and the costs of the prosecution.

TORRES, J., dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in the case of the United States v. Lagason, for treason, I am of the opinion that the defendants Arturo Baldello and Daniel Songco Alcantara should be sentenced to life imprisonment and to the payment each of a fine of $20,000, United States currency, with one-ninth part of the costs. I can not, therefore, concur in the opinion of the majority.

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

The evidence in this case clearly discloses the fact that the said defendants constituted an armed band, organized for the express purpose of overthrowing the Government of the United States in the Philippine Islands, as constituted in the pueblo of Guagua, in the Province of Pampanga, and that on the 14th day of April, 1903, said band made an organized attempt to carry out this unlawful purpose.

These facts were supported by the testimony of more than two witnesses. The defendants are guilty of the crime of treason, and should be punished under section 1 of Act No. 292 of the Civil Commission. The judge below properly appreciated the facts. He committed no error, and his judgment should therefore be affirmed with the costs in both instances.

COOPER, J., dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

The defendants should be found guilty of treason as defined and punished by section 1, Act No. 292, and the punishment fixed as is prescribed in said section.

This conclusion is based upon the grounds stated in my dissenting opinion filed in the case of the United States v. Lagnason just decided by this court.

Endnotes:



1. Page 472, supra.




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






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