Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1905 > February 1905 Decisions > G.R. No. 1886 February 4, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. CANDELARIO CUISON

004 Phil 194:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 1886. February 4, 1905. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. CANDELARIO CUISON, Defendant-Appellant.

Ledesma, Sumulong & Quintos, for Appellant.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; ROBBERY; DISCHARGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY. — An officer who takes possession of personal property by means of a search warrant lawfully issued and properly served can not be held liable for the crime of robbery of the said property.


D E C I S I O N


JOHNSON, J. :


The defendant in this case was charged with the crime of robbery in that he did, on or about the 20th day of October, 1903, in the municipality of Danao, of the Province of Cebu, enter the house of one Salvador Casas, and then and there, with intent to gain and by means of intimidation, appropriate to himself thirty "tejidos de nipa" and one "haz tambien de hojas de nipa."cralaw virtua1aw library

After hearing the proof in said cause the Court of First Instance of the Province of Cebu sentenced the said defendant to be imprisoned for the period of six months and one day in the provincial jail of the Province of Cebu, to pay to the said Salvador Casas the amount of 75 cents, Mexican, the value of the nipa stolen, and the costs of the suit, and in case of insolvency to suffer prision subsidiaria.

The evidence shows that the said defendant did enter the house of Salvador Casas on the day mentioned in said complaint, and take and carry away the quantity of nipa stated in said complaint. The defendant, however, introduced proof to show that he entered the house of the said Casas and carried away the said nipa by virtue of a search warrant, issued by the justice of the peace of the pueblo of Danao. This fact is supported by the testimony of the justice of the peace of said pueblo.

While the search warrant under which the defendant alleges that he took possession of the said nipa was not offered in evidence, yet the statement or the defendant, confirmed by the testimony of the said justice of the peace, convinces us that the defendant did, by lawful means, take possession of the said nipa, and is therefore not guilty of the crime of robbery. The defendant and the said justice of the peace each allege that the search warrant was issued for the purpose of searching the house of the said Casas, and for the purpose of taking possession of the nipa described in the complaint in this case. The defendant at the time of the service of the said warrant was president of the pueblo of Danao.

An officer who takes possession of personal property by means of a search warrant lawfully issued and properly served can not be held liable for the crime of robbery of the said property. The judgment of the court below is therefore reversed, and the defendant is discharged, with costs de oficio. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa and Carson, 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






February-1905 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1657 February 1, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. SULPICIO ALIÑO ET AL.

    004 Phil 181

  • G.R. No. 1942 February 1, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. LOPE DEDICATORIA

    004 Phil 183

  • G.R. No. 1459 February 2, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. JOHN MACK

    004 Phil 185

  • G.R. No. 1678 February 2, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. BRAULIO ALMASAN

    004 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. 1961 February 2, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. ESTEBAN BAUTISTA, ET AL.

    004 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 1865 February 3, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIO LACANELAO SANTOS, ET AL.

    004 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. 1886 February 4, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. CANDELARIO CUISON

    004 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 1157 February 6, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. HILARION GUZMAN

    004 Phil 196

  • G.R. No. 1940 February 6, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS PALILIO, ET AL.

    004 Phil 198

  • G.R. No. 1568 February 10, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. AQUILINO CALVO

    004 Phil 201

  • G.R. No. 2342 February 10, 1905 - CONCEPCION CALVO v. ANGELES O. DE GUTIERREZ, ET AL.

    004 Phil 203

  • G.R. No. 1662 February 13, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE YAMBAO

    004 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. 1686 February 13, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. PAULINO PALISOC, ET AL.

    004 Phil 207

  • G.R. No. 1731 February 13, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. DANIEL MARINAY, ET AL.

    004 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. 1990 February 13, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. SIXTO PABLO

    004 Phil 215

  • G.R. No. 1728 February 15, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO DALUSONG

    004 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. 1912 February 15, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. ENRIQUE CAIDO, ET AL.

    004 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 1768 February 17, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. CATALINO GERALE, ET AL.

    004 Phil 218

  • G.R. No. 1322 February 18, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. TEODORO PINEDA

    004 Phil 223

  • G.R. No. 1787 February 21, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. LOPENA ET AL.

    004 Phil 224

  • G.R. No. 1751 February 23, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. VICENTE LOZADA

    004 Phil 226

  • G.R. No. 2063 February 24, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. TOMAS BIRUEDA

    004 Phil 229

  • G.R. No. 1663 February 28, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. FIDELES RANA, ET AL.

    004 Phil 231

  • G.R. No. 2203 February 28, 1905 - UNITED STATES v. DOMINGO SALCEDO

    004 Phil 234