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
 

   
January-1916 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 9518 January 3, 1916 - FRANCISCO ROSCO v. MARIANO REBUENO

    033 Phil 105

  • G.R. No. 10318 January 3, 1916 - ANTONIO M.A BARRETTO v. TOMAS CABREZA

    033 Phil 112

  • G.R. Nos. 11379 & 11380 January 3, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. YU TEN

    033 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. 10992 January 6, 1916 - QUE QUAY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. 10089 January 7, 1916 - VICTORIA AYLLON v. MIGUEL SIOJO

    033 Phil 145

  • G.R. No. 10212 January 7, 1916 - INSULAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO. v. GAUDENCIO ELEIZEGUI

    033 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. 9252 January 11, 1916 - SINFOROSO PASCUAL v. WM. T. NOLTING

    033 Phil 154

  • G.R. No. 9759 January 11, 1916 - PHILIPPINE RAILWAY CO. v. IGNACIO DURAN

    033 Phil 156

  • G.R. No. 10422 January 11, 1916 - A. LEMOINE v. C. ALKAN

    033 Phil 162

  • G.R. No. 10863 January 11, 1916 - HERMOGENES DE JESUS v. G. URRUTIA & CO.

    033 Phil 171

  • G.R. No. 11078 January 11, 1916 - CLIFFORD H. LOGAN v. PHILIPPINE ACETYLENE CO.

    033 Phil 177

  • G.R. No. 11088 January 11, 1916 - LIM CHING v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. 7798 January 14, 1916 - ANGELA C. GARCIA v. JOAQUIN DEL ROSARIO

    033 Phil 189

  • G.R. Nos. 10381 & 10714 January 14, 1916 - TRITON INSURANCE CO. v. ANGEL JOSE

    033 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 10738 January 14, 1916 - RUEDA HERMANOS & CO. v. FELIX PAGLINAWAN & CO.

    033 Phil 196

  • G.R. No. 10849 January 14, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. LUIS IGNACIO

    033 Phil 202

  • G.R. No. 11015 January 14, 1916 - PERPETUO FLORES TAN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 205

  • G.R. No. 11002 January 17, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. MATEO P. PALACIO

    033 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 7988 January 19, 1916 - YOUNG MEN’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MANILA v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    033 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 9806 January 19, 1916 - LEONIDES LOPEZ LISO v. MANUEL TAMBUNTING

    033 Phil 226

  • G.R. No. 10141 January 20, 1916 - MARGARITA SANTOS v. AGUSTIN ACOSTA

    033 Phil 229

  • G.R. No. 10711 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. KONG FONG

    033 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. 10731 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO LOPEZ QUIM QUINCO

    033 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. 10783 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. AGRIPINO AGONCILLO

    033 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 10854 January 21, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. NG TUY

    033 Phil 261

  • G.R. No. 10436 January 24, 1916 - FRANCISCA EGUARAS v. GREAT EASTERN LIFE ASSURANCE CO.

    033 Phil 263

  • G.R. No. 10989 January 24, 1916 - GO PAW v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 278

  • G.R. No. 10759 January 25, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VERZOLA

    033 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. 10259 January 26, 1916 - CITY OF MANILA v. ALICE J. NEAL

    033 Phil 291

  • G.R. No. 9087 January 27, 1916 - MARIANO G. VELOSO v. JOSE HEREDIA

    033 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. 10057 January 27, 1916 - DIAO CONTINO v. NOVO & COMPANY

    033 Phil 310

  • G.R. No. 10099 January 27, 1916 - TEOFILA DEL ROSARIO DE COSTA v. LA BADENIA

    033 Phil 316

  • G.R. No. 10528 January 27, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO MONTEROSO

    033 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. 10537 January 27, 1916 - M. EARNSHAW & COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. 10972 January 28, 1916 - LEE CHING v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 10557 January 29, 1916 - MARIA BALTAZAR v. APOLONIA ALBERTO

    033 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 10907 January 29, 1916 - ONG JANG CHUAN v. WISE & CO. (LTD.)

    033 Phil 339

  • G.R. No. 10040 January 31, 1916 - EUGENIA LICHAUCO v. FAUSTINO LICHAUCO

    033 Phil 350

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 10759   January 25, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VERZOLA<br /><br />033 Phil 285

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 10759. January 25, 1916. ]

    HE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PEDRO VERZOLA, Defendant-Appellant.

    Moreno & Guevara for Appellant.

    Attorney-General Avanceña for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. HOMICIDE; KILLING OF PARAMOUR OF SUPPOSED WIFE. — The defendant Verzola, charged with killing his wife’s paramour, returning home unexpectedly, found his wife in flagrante with the deceased whom he instantly set upon and killed. The accused and his wife were married twenty years before, that is, during the Spanish domination, by a lieutenant of the guardia civil, and had lived together continuously as man and wife up to the time of the commission of the crime and raised a family. Both of the parties honestly believed that they were legally married and lived together for twenty years in that belief:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Held, (1) That section 423 of the Penal Code exempting an accused from punishment was not applicable, for the reason that the accused was not lawfully married to the woman he called his wife at the time that the accused killed her paramour.

    Held, further, (2) That the accused and his alleged wife, although twenty years before, and during the Spanish domination, had been married by a lieutenant of the guardia civil and had continuously lived together as man and wife since that time in the honest belief that they were lawfully married and had raised a family, were not lawfully married and that section 9 of General Orders No. 68 has no bearing or application under such circumstances.


    D E C I S I O N


    CARSON, J. :


    The facts in this case are substantially analogous with those in the case of the United States v. Tubban (29 Phil. Rep., 434). Upon the authority of that decision, and in accord with the prayer of counsel for the accused and of the recommendation of the Attorney-General the sentence imposed in the lower court should be modified by substituting the penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor for so much thereof as imposes twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal. Thus modified, the sentence imposed in the court below should be, and is hereby affirmed with the costs of this instance against the Appellant. So ordered.

    Arellano, C.J., Torres, and Trent, JJ., concur.

    Johnson, J., dissents.

    Separate Opinions


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

    The decision in this case and in that of the United States v. Tubban (29 Phil. Rep., 434), together affect in an extraordinary way the children of the wild or non-Christian tribes of the Philippine Islands. They make every child belonging to those tribes illegitimate and the relations of their fathers and mothers immoral. These two decisions deprive those children not only of their legitimacy but affect their standing in regard to their property rights also. Being illegitimate, or at least natural, they suffer all the disabilities which the Civil Code places on such children. This result is accomplished, so far as I have been able to discover, not only against the doctrine laid down by the courts of nearly all countries but also, in my judgment, against the provisions of a statute of the Philippine Islands designed and enacted to prevent the very result produced by these decisions. (Sec. 9, General Orders No. 68.)

    The question in the two cases referred to is the same; and springs out of the refusal of the court to apply article 423 of the Penal Code in favor of the accused who was charged in one case with the murder of the wife’s paramour, and in the other with grave physical injuries inflicted upon the wife’s seducer, both crimes being committed on the occasion of the husband suddenly returning home and surprising the wife and her paramour in flagrante. The crimes having been committed under such circumstances article 423 of the Penal Code relieves the husband from all punishment except that of destierro. One of the essential requisites for the application of the article is that there shall have been a legal marriage between the husband and the wife; in other words, that, in the eyes of the law, the two shall have been man and wife.

    In both of the cases referred to there was no question about the facts. The wife and the paramour were caught in the act and the punishment was inflicted by the husband on the instant. The only question raised on the trial or here was the legality of the marriage between the accused and the woman whom he called his wife. It is admitted by the court and by all the parties that, if there was a legal marriage, the article is applicable. In the Tubban case a marriage according to the customs of the tribe was found by the court, the decision saying:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Giving the accused the benefit of any reasonable doubt raised by the record, we are of opinion that the evidence discloses that on June 22, 1913, he was a youth less than 18 years of age and a member of an uncivilized tribe of Kalingas settled on a rancheria within the territorial jurisdiction of the Province of Cagayan; that prior to that date he had been living with the family of a young girl named Dengon, about 15 years of age, with whom he sustained relations which were recognized by the members of his tribe as that of man and wife; that some sort of tribal wedding ceremony had taken place upon which these relations were based, but that he was not married to the girl in accordance with the laws of the Philippine Islands (note that no reference is made to section 9 of G. O. No. 68 which provides the exact contrary); that on the date above indicated he discovered the girl, in flagrante, in the arms of another member of the tribe named Dumog; that he there and then struck Dumog with a head ax, inflicting a wound in the right shoulder as a result of which Dumog died on the 3d of the following July.

    "Counsel for appellant contends that the convict should have been given the benefit of the provisions of article 423 of the Penal Code, which are as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Any husband who, having surprised his wife in the act of adultery, shall kill her or her paramour in the act, or shall inflict any serious physical injuries upon either, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.

    "If he shall inflict physical injuries of any other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.’

    x       x       x


    "It is evident, however, that the provisions of this article are intended to apply only in cases where the husband is lawfully married to the offending wife. There is no authority in law for their extension to include cases wherein the relations between the parties are other than those contemplated by the legislator (note the exclusion made by the legislative authority which passed section 9, G. O. No. 68). It appears from the record that the accused in this case was living on a rancheria in the municipality of Mauanan in the duly organized Province of Cagayan, and we are not advised of any provision of law which recognizes as legal a tribal marriage of so-called non-Christians or members of uncivilized tribes, celebrated within that province without compliance with the requisites prescribed by General Orders, No. 68." (Note the omission of section 9 of said order.)

    We see from this quotation that, in that case, there was a marriage according to the customs of the tribe to which the accused belong and that such marriage was consummated by the martial act and that the accused and his wife were living together in martial relations sanctioned and accepted by his tribe at the time the events transpired which were the cause of his conviction and sentence, and they were thus living with the honest belief that they were legally married.

    In the Verzola case the defendant and Sixta Layoc, his wife, were married twenty years ago, that is during the Spanish domination, by a lieutenant of the guardia civil. While they knew that they had not been married according to the requirements of the church, they believed that they had been legally married, and, in that belief, lived together for more than 20 years as man and wife, having one child, Julian Verzola, as the result of such cohabitation. They were thus living together at the time the events occurred which led to this prosecution.

    The particular point in this case with which I am so strongly impressed is the ground on which the court refused to apply article 423 of the Penal Code quoted above. It is that not a marriage which has taken place among the wild tribes in the Philippine Islands in accordance with their laws, customs, and ceremonies is valid or of any force or effect whatever under the laws of the Islands. In other words, that such marriages are beyond the pale of the law. This doctrine is so far-reaching in its consequences that nothing need be said as to its soundness on general principles; but when we take into consideration the fact that there is a statute which was designed and enacted for the purpose of preventing the very result which the decision of the court produces in this case the impossibility of sustaining the decision is evident. Section 9 of General Orders No. 68 provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "No marriage heretofore solemnized before any person professing to have authority therefor shall be invalid for want of such authority or on account of any informality, irregularity, or omission, if it was celebrated with the belief of the parties, or either of them, that he had authority and that they have been lawfully married."cralaw virtua1aw library

    No comment is necessary to show that the purpose of this article is thwarted by the decision in this case. If a case could be imagined where the article ought to be applied it is the one before us. If a man who has been married, although informally, for more than twenty years and has, during all that time, maintained with the person whom he honestly believed to be his lawful wife full marital relations, and who has a family springing from that relation, can receive no protection from section 9 of General Orders No. 68, what was the purpose of enacting it and of what avail can it be to anyone?

    For convenience the Tubban case is published in the footnote to this case. 1

    Endnotes:



    1. CARSON, J. :


    The appellant was convicted in the court below of the crime of asesinato (murder), and sentenced to seventeen years four months and one day of cadena temporal, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P500, and to pay the costs of the trial.

    Giving the accused the benefit of any reasonable doubt raised by the record, we are of opinion that the evidence discloses that on June 22, 1913, he was a youth less than 18 years of age and a member of an uncivilized tribe of Kalingas settled on a rancheria within the territorial jurisdiction of the Province of Cagayan; that prior to that date he had been living with the family of a young girl named Dengon, about 15 years of age, with whom he sustained relations which were recognized by the members of his tribe as that of man and wife; that some sort of tribal wedding ceremony had taken place upon which these relations were based, but that he was not married to the girl in accordance with the laws of the Philippine Islands; that on the date above indicated he discovered the girl, in flagrante, in the arms of another member of the tribe named Dumog; that he there and then struck Dumog with a head ax, inflicting a wound in the right shoulder as a result of which Dumog died on the 3d of the following July.

    Counsel for appellant contends that the convict should have been given the benefit of the provisions of article 423 of the Penal Code, which are as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Any husband who, having surprised his wife in the act of adultery, shall kill her or her paramour in the act, or shall inflict any serious physical injuries upon either, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.

    "If he shall inflict physical injuries of any other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.

    "These rules shall be applicable under similar circumstances to parents with respect to any daughter under twenty-three years of age and her seducer while the daughter is living with the parents.

    "Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article."cralaw virtua1aw library

    It is evident, however, that the provisions of this article are intended to apply only in cases where the husband is lawfully married to the offending wife. There is no authority in law for their extension to include cases wherein the relations between the parties are other than those contemplated by the legislator. It appears from the record that the accused in this case was living on a rancheria in the municipality of Mauanan in the duly organized Province of Cagayan, and we are not advised of any provision of law which recognizes as legal a tribal marriage of so-called non-Christians or members of uncivilized tribes, celebrated within that province without compliance with the requisites prescribed by General Orders No. 68.

    We are of opinion, nevertheless, that under the provisions of subsection 8 of article 9 of the Penal Code the fact that the accused and the girl Dengon were living together as husband and wife, and were recognized as such by the other members of the tribe, should be taken into consideration as a marked extenuating circumstance.

    We hold also that the fact that the accused is shown to be a member of an uncivilized tribe, of a low order of intelligence, uncultured, and uneducated, should be taken into consideration as a second marked extenuating circumstance. (Art. 11 of the Penal Code as amended.)

    The accused having been a youth of less than 18 years of age at the time when the crime was committed, the penalty to be imposed upon his conviction of the crime charged in the information is that next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for that offense when committed by one of full age.

    Under all the circumstances of this case we think we should give the accused the benefit of article 81 of the Code as amended by Act No. 2298, which authorizes the courts, in their discretion, to impose a penalty one degree lower than that prescribed in the Code where it appears that the commission of the offense was marked with two or more marked extenuating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances.

    We conclude that the judgment of conviction and the sentence entered in the court below should be modified by substituting for so much thereof as imposes seventeen years four months and one day of cadena temporal, the penalty of six years and one day of presidio correccional, and thus modified the sentence imposed in the lower court should be affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the Appellant. So ordered.

    Arellano, C.J., Torres, and Araullo, JJ., concur.

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

    I cannot agree to the decision in this case. I believe article 423 of the Penal Code should be applied. The refusal of the court to apply it and the grounds on which that refusal is based completely wipe out the marriage relations among the wild tribes as an institution and make the relations between those who have married according to their tribal custom adulterous and their children illegitimate.

    G.R. No. 10759   January 25, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VERZOLA<br /><br />033 Phil 285


    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