Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > August 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. 4513 August 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMON CABONCE

011 Phil 169:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 4513. August 28, 1908. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SIMON CABONCE, Defendant-Appellant.

J. Syyap for Appellant.

Attorney-General Araneta for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. HOMICIDE; ACCESSARIES; SUFFICIENCY OF PROOF. — Where no agreement was entered into between two persons for the commission of a crime, and the one gave no direct order, command, or inducement to the other to commit the crime, even if the presumed instigator were present at the time when it was committed, it can not be held, under the law, that there was any intentional instigation, and actual, direct and efficient inducement showing the criminal participation of the alleged instigator in the execution of the crime.


D E C I S I O N


TORRES, J. :


In the afternoon of the 8th of September, 1907, Eulogio Criselda and Pedro Diaz had a misunderstanding in the presence of Simon Cabonce, at the cockpit of Cabadbaran, Province of Surigao, in connection with the payment of a wager of P0.50 which Diaz refused to satisfy. They parted without further trouble and Criselda returned to his home. Shortly thereafter he went to the house of Cabonce to gamble, and, as he saw that the latter had a dagger in his hand, without saying anything, he took the weapon away from Cabonce who made no objection but immediately said to him: "Have courage; I will look out for you." Criselda then left Cabonce’s and on passing near the house of Pedro Diaz he met the latter on the road; Criselda said "good evening," as it was almost 7 o’clock, and immediately struck him in the stomach with the dagger. In consequence of the would received Diaz died some hours later. Proceedings were instituted against Eulogio Criselda, and the court below entered judgment on the 9th of November, 1907, sentencing him to the penalty of cadena perpetua. On the 7th of November, the provincial fiscal filed a complaint against Simon Cabonce basing it on the foregoing proceedings, and charged him with the crime of murder. The case was then heard and the judge held that he was guilty of the crime of homicide as author thereof by instigation, and sentenced him to the penalty of fourteen years eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, to suffer the accessory penalties, and, together with Eulogio Criselda, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Diaz in the sum of P1,000, with costs. From this judgment the accused has appealed.

In view of the crime of murder committed by Eulogio Criselda on the person of Pedro Diaz, for which he was prosecuted and sentenced to cadena perpetua, Simon Cabonce was also accused of the same crime on a separate complaint presented by the provincial fiscal charging him with having instigated the violent death of the said Pedro Diaz, executed by Eulogio Criselda, the actual author of the crime in question; therefore, there only remains now to examine and fix the part that the accused Simon Cabonce took in the said crime, and whether, as affirmed by the prosecution, he was the instigator thereof and consequently liable as coprincipal.

Article 13 of the Penal Code provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The following are considered as principals:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act.

"2. Those who directly force or induce others to execute it.

"3. Those who cooperate in the execution of the act by another act without which it could not have been accomplished."cralaw virtua1aw library

From the bulk of the evidence offered in the case it can not be deduced that Simon Cabonce did directly force or induce Eulogio Criselda to kill Pedro Diaz with a dagger; as to the statements by Criselda that Cabonce had ordered him to kill Diaz because he was a nuisance in the pueblo and that he would look after his wife’s maintenance in case he lost his liberty, upon rectification it appears that Criselda testified that Cabonce, when handing him the dagger, said to him; "Have courage, and I will take care of you." Such statements, differing from each other where not absolutely contradictory do not establish the fact that the accused participated in the act by directly instigating the execution of the crime, and with greater reason if it is remembered that the accused denied that the dagger belonged to or came from him, or that he had ever uttered the words that Criselda, without corroboration, attributed to him.

The mere presence of the accused Cabonce at the time of the commission of the crime, suspected but not satisfactorily proved in the case; the contents of the letters or notes that passed between Criselda and Cabonce when they were both in jail, and the other data in the case, do not fully prove the guilt of Cabonce, nor that between the latter and Criselda there had been an agreement to commit the crime, or that Cabonce had ordered, instigated, or induced Criselda in a direct and efficient manner to commit it; because, even if the words, as alleged by Criselda, were uttered by the accused in the latter’s house, they do not constitute an actual intentional instigation, or a direct and efficient inducement showing criminal participation; the killing of Pedro Diaz by Criselda was his own voluntary act and was not induced by foreign influence.

Even though doubt may exist as to the innocence of Simon Cabonce, on account of certain data which appear in the record, this is not sufficient to warrant a finding of guilty, and he should therefore be acquitted in accordance with the provisions of section 57 of General Orders No. 58, which provides that —

"A defendant in a criminal action shall be presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved, and in case of a reasonable doubt that his guilt is satisfactorily shown he shall be entitled to an acquittal."cralaw virtua1aw library

For the reasons above set forth it is our opinion that the judgment ,appealed from should be reversed, and Simon Cabonce, the accused herein, is hereby acquitted with the costs in both instances de oficio, and he will at once be liberated if he is not detained on any other charge. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Carson, Willard and Tracey, 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






August-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 3837 August 1, 1908 - BENIGNO CATABIAN v. FRANCISCO TUNGCUL

    011 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. 4537 August 1, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO POBRE

    011 Phil 51

  • G.R. No. 4381 August 4, 1908 - MANUEL LOPEZ, ET AL. v. RAMON N. OROZCO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 53

  • G.R. No. 4498 August 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LEOCADIO SALGADO

    011 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. 3831 August 6, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CANUTO BUTARDO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 60

  • G.R. No. 4519 August 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO IDON

    011 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. 3897 August 10, 1908 - ZACARIAS OMO v. INSULAR GOV’T.

    011 Phil 67

  • G.R. No. 4133 August 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO DULFO

    011 Phil 75

  • G.R. No. 4027 August 12, 1908 - JOSEFA GARCIA PASCUAL v. LUIS PALOMAR BALDOVI

    011 Phil 79

  • G.R. No. 4054 August 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. GUILLERMO ALVARADO

    011 Phil 87

  • G.R. No. 4032 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARCELO F. CONCEPCION

    011 Phil 90

  • G.R. No. 4141 August 15, 1908 - AGUSTINA FAELNAR, ET AL. v. JACINTA ESCAÑO

    011 Phil 92

  • G.R. No. 4330 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO FENIX

    011 Phil 95

  • G.R. No. 4340 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CHESTER A. DAVIS

    011 Phil 96

  • G.R. No. 4464 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIPE IDOS

    011 Phil 99

  • G.R. No. 4277 August 18, 1908 - POTENCIANA TABIGUE v. FRANK E. GREEN

    011 Phil 102

  • G.R. No. 4282 August 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CHIONG CHUICO

    011 Phil 106

  • G.R. No. 4287 August 18, 1908 - PHIL. PRODUCTS CO. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    011 Phil 107

  • G.R. No. 4317 August 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO MONTECILLO

    011 Phil 109

  • G.R. No. 3818 August 19, 1908 - EDWARD B. MERCHANT v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

    011 Phil 116

  • G.R. No. 4223 August 19, 1908 - NICOLAS LUNOD, ET AL. v. HIGINO MENESES

    011 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. 4382 August 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

    011 Phil 133

  • G.R. No. 4468 August 21, 1908 - RUBERT & GUAMIS v. C. A. SMITH

    011 Phil 138

  • G.R. No. 4015 August 24, 1908 - ANGEL JAVELLANA v. JOSE LIM, ET AL.

    011 Phil 141

  • G.R. No. 4390 August 24, 1908 - ANG TOA v. BASILIA ALVAREZ, ET AL.

    011 Phil 146

  • G.R. No. 4365 August 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FERNANDO ESTABILLO

    011 Phil 150

  • G.R. No. 4384 August 27, 1908 - SIMEON ALCONABA, ET AL. v. MAGNO ABINEZ

    011 Phil 152

  • G.R. No. 4410 August 27, 1908 - URBANO FLORIANO v. ESTEBAN DELGADO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 154

  • G.R. No. 4477 August 27, 1908 - IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MALIGNAD v. BRIGIDA

    011 Phil 158

  • G.R. No. 4529 August 27, 1908 - LUISA TENGCO v. VICENTE SANZ

    011 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. 4513 August 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMON CABONCE

    011 Phil 169

  • G.R. No. 4642 August 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIDNEY LEE BAYLEES

    011 Phil 172

  • G.R. No. 4383 August 31, 1908 - ZACARIAS BAGSA v. CRISOSTOMO NAGRAMADA

    011 Phil 174

  • G.R. No. 4385 August 31, 1908 - WALTER E. OLSEN v. BERT YEARSLEY

    011 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 4411 August 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RUFINO DELOSO

    011 Phil 180

  • G.R. No. 4689 August 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. GO TIAO

    011 Phil 183