Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1909 > September 1909 Decisions > G.R. No. 4887 September 18, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS JAVELLANA, ET AL.

014 Phil 186:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 4887. September 18, 1909. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NICOLAS JAVELLANA, ET AL., Defendants. — FRANCISCO RUFO, Appellant.

Josue Soncuya for Appellant.

Attorney-General Villamor for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. HOMICIDE; DYING DECLARATIONS. — United States v. Gil (13 Phil. Rep., 530), followed as to admissibility of ante-mortem statements.

2. ID.; "PRIMA FACIE" EVIDENCE; MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE. — The prosecution having established prima facie the commission of a crime by the accused without aggravating or extenuating circumstances, it devolves upon the defendant to offer evidence as to the existence of extenuating circumstances, if he desires the court to take such circumstances into consideration in imposing the penalty.


D E C I S I O N


CARSON, J. :


Francisco Rufo, the appellant in this case, was convicted of the crime of homicide, and sentenced to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, the trial court imposing the prescribed penalty in its minimum degree, because it was of opinion that the crime was immediately preceded by strong provocation on the part of the deceased, one of the extenuating circumstances defined in article 9 of the Penal Code.

The only evidence touching the actual infliction of the fatal wounds and connecting Rufo therewith was the testimony of a justice of the peace as to an ante-mortem statement made by the deceased; but this statement taken together with satisfactorily proof that the deceased came to his death as a result of a wound inflicted upon him at or about the time indicated in his statement, and that the accused was one of a party who at about the same time arrested the deceased, who was charged with disorderly conduct, in our opinion establishes the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Counsel for appellant, in an interesting and exhaustive discussion of the provisions of law in force in these Islands in relation to the admissibility of ante-mortem statements in evidence, insists that the trial court erred in admitting testimony as to the ante-mortem statement of the deceased in this case, but substantially similar contention were decided adversely by this court in the recent case of the United States v. Gil 1 (decided April 26, 1909), published since counsel’s argument was submitted in this case.

Counsel also contends that the trial court erred in failing to give the appellant the benefit of certain extenuating circumstances, but in our opinion the ante-mortem statement of the deceased, the only evidence of record as to the circumstances under which the fatal wound was inflicted, does not establish the existence of either aggravating or extenuating circumstances, not even the fact found by the trial court that the commission of the crime was immediately preceded by strong provocation on the part of the deceased. It may well have been that the commission of the crime was marked with various extenuating circumstances, but the prosecution having established, prima facie, the commission of the crime without either aggravating or extenuating circumstances, it devolved upon the defendant to offer evidence as to the existence of extenuating circumstances, if he desired the court to take such circumstances into consideration in imposing the penalty.

The crime having been committed without aggravating or extenuating circumstances, the prescribed penalty should have been imposed in its medium degree, and the sentence of the trial court should be and is hereby modified, by substituting for the penalty of twelve years and one day the penalty of fourteen years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal, together with the accessory penalties prescribed in article 19 [59] of the Penal Code, and thus modified the sentence appealed from should be and is hereby affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the Appellant.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson and Moreland, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. 13 Phil. Rep., 530.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com





September-1909 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 5153 September 1, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. BARTOLOME MIJARES

    014 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. 5171 September 1, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. LAO LOCK HING

    014 Phil 86

  • G.R. No. 5126 September 2, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. CATALINO APOSTOL

    014 Phil 92

  • G.R. No. 3862 September 6, 1909 - JUAN G. BOSQUE v. YU CHIPCO

    014 Phil 95

  • G.R. No. 4437 September 9, 1909 - TOMAS OSMEÑA v. CENONA RAMA

    014 Phil 99

  • G.R. No. 4471 September 9, 1909 - DAMASA SEGUI v. CANDIDO SEGUI

    014 Phil 102

  • G.R. No. 5273 September 9, 1909 - FRANCISCA JOSE v. WENCESLAUA DAMIAN

    014 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. 5067 September 11, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. CORNELIO MANALO

    016 Phil 654

  • G.R. No. 5618 September 14, 1909 - IN RE: H. G. SMITH

    014 Phil 112

  • G.R. No. 4177 September 15, 1909 - AGATON ARANETA v. BRAULIO MONTELIBANO

    014 Phil 117

  • G.R. No. 4235 September 15, 1909 - SANTIAGO TIN FIAN v. PABLO TAN

    014 Phil 126

  • G.R. No. 4963 September 15, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. GO CHICO

    014 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. 5156 September 15, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. SEBASTIAN MISOLA

    014 Phil 142

  • G.R. No. 5165 September 15, 1909 - GERVASIO UNSON v. SEGUNDO ABRERA

    014 Phil 146

  • G.R. No. 5185 September 15, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO MENESES

    014 Phil 151

  • G.R. No. 5150 September 16, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. MARCIANO LOPEZ

    014 Phil 155

  • G.R. No. 4236 September 18, 1909 - SANTIAGO TIU FIAN v. HILARIO YAP

    014 Phil 158

  • G.R. No. 4445 September 18, 1909 - CATALINA BUGNAO v. FRANCISCO UBAG, ET AL.

    014 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. 4609 September 18, 1909 - QUE YONG KENG v. RAFAEL TAN QUICO

    014 Phil 173

  • G.R. No. 4694 September 18, 1909 - ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA v. MUN. OF ROSARIO

    014 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. 4887 September 18, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS JAVELLANA, ET AL.

    014 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. 4973 September 18, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. BERNABE CATIPON, ET AL.

    014 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 5003 September 18, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX DE JESUS

    014 Phil 190

  • G.R. No. 5262 September 18, 1909 - FRANCISCO ROSA HERNANDEZ, ET AL. v. MELECIO PADUA, ET AL.

    014 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 4263 September 22, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. ESTEFANIA MENDOZA, ET AL.

    014 Phil 198

  • G.R. No. 4837 September 22, 1909 - FRANCISCO IMPERIAL v. JOSE ALEJANDRE

    014 Phil 203

  • G.R. No. 4234 September 23, 1909 - RUPERTA ORAIS v. JACINTA ESCAÑO

    014 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 4759 September 23, 1909 - SEBASTIAN CABILLAS v. ALFONSO APDUHAN, ET AL.

    014 Phil 213

  • G.R. No. 4971 September 23, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. AUGUSTUS HICKS

    014 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 5194 September 23, 1909 - CHINESE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. PUA TE CHING, ET AL.

    014 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 5108 September 30, 1909 - UNITED STATES v. NICOMEDES MORALES

    014 Phil 227