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
 

   
September-1939 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 46562 September 13, 1939 - BARDWIL BROS. v. PHIL. LABOR UNION

    068 Phil 436

  • G.R. No. 46673 September 13, 1939 - ANDRES P. GOSECO v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    068 Phil 444

  • G.R. No. 45596 September 18, 1939 - MARCOS LIPANA v. DOMlNGO LAO Y OTROS

    068 Phil 451

  • G.R. No. 46412 September 18, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANOJI

    068 Phil 471

  • G.R. No. 46497 September 18, 1939 - ANTONIO S. SANAGUSTIN v. CONRADO BARRIOS

    068 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. 46170 September 20, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FERMIN PUNTO

    068 Phil 481

  • G.R. No. 46780 September 20, 1939 - FISCAL OF CAMARINES NORTE v. JUDGE OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CAMARINES NORTE

    068 Phil 483

  • G.R. No. 46108 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DATU GALANTU MEDTED

    068 Phil 485

  • G.R. No. 46109 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOLAS CARPIO

    068 Phil 490

  • G.R. No. 46197 September 22, 1939 - KINKWA MERIYASU CO. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    068 Phil 501

  • G.R. No. 46302 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TORIBIO C. COSTES

    068 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. 46578 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANICETO MARQUEZ

    068 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. 46580 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO DE GUZMAN

    068 Phil 508

  • G.R. No. 46602 September 22, 1939 - YAP TAK WING & CO. v. MUNICIPAL BOARD

    068 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. 46686 September 22, 1939 - TRANQUILINO RUBIS v. PHILIPPINE CHARITY SWEEPSTAKES

    068 Phil 515

  • G.R. No. 46715 September 22, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMILIO DE JESUS

    068 Phil 517

  • G.R. No. 46068 September 23, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUSTAQUIO CAROZ

    068 Phil 521

  • G.R. No. 46650 September 23, 1939 - MARIO BENGZON v. AUDITOR GENERAL

    068 Phil 527

  • G.R. No. 46652 September 23, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CASIMIRO CONCEPCION

    068 Phil 530

  • G.R. Nos. 46802-46812 September 23, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RESURRECCION B. PEÑAS

    068 Phil 533

  • G.R. No. 46739 September 23, 1939 - PAMPANGA BUS CO., INC. v. PAMBUSCO EMPLOYEES UNION

    068 Phil 541

  • G.R. No. 46668 September 26, 1939 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. v. PAMPANGA SUGAR MILLS

    068 Phil 547

  • G.R. No. 46729 September 25, 1939 - KAPISANAN NG MGA MANGAGAWA SA PANTRANCO v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    068 Phil 552

  • Adm. Case No. 879 September 27, 1939 - PEDRO DE GUZMAN v. TOMAS B. TADEO

    068 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. 46080 September 27, 1939 - GUILLERMO A. CU UNJIENG v. HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORP.

    068 Phil 559

  • G.R. No. 46094 September 27, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FERNANDO C. QUEBRAL

    068 Phil 564

  • G.R. No. 46237 September 27, 1939 - ROSALIO MARQUEZ v. BERNARDO CASTILLO

    068 Phil 568

  • G.R. No. 46350 September 27, 1939 - TAN CHAY v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL.

    068 Phil 572

  • G.R. No. 46470 September 27, 1939 - JUAN CASTILLO v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    068 Phil 577

  • G.R. No. 46539 September 27, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VALENTIN DOQUEÑA

    068 Phil 580

  • G.R. Nos. 46553-46555 September 27, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEON FABILLAR

    068 Phil 584

  • G.R. No. 46615 September 27, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO AQUINO

    068 Phil 588

  • G.R. No. 46727 September 27, 1939 - PAMBUSCO EMPLOYEES’ UNION v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    068 Phil 591

  • G.R. No. 46168 September 29, 1939 - INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER CO. OF THE PHIL. v. DELFIN MAHINAY

    068 Phil 597

  • G.R. No. 46336 September 29, 1939 - REVEREND ULRIC ARCAND v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    068 Phil 601

  • G.R. No. 46458 September 29, 1939 - ERLANGER & GALINGER v. HERMENEGILDO G. ALAGAR

    068 Phil 610

  • G.R. No. 46725 September 29, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMINO AQUINO

    068 Phil 615

  • G.R. No. 46023 September 30, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS FLORENDO

    068 Phil 619

  • G.R. No. 46252 September 30, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONOR DE MOLL

    068 Phil 626

  • G.R. No. 46298 September 30, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DATU AMBIS

    068 Phil 635

  • G.R. No. 46390 September 30, 1939 - CASIMIRO TIANGCO v. PROCESO FRANCISCO

    068 Phil 639

  • G.R. No. 46396 September 30, 1939 - ALEJANDRO DE GUZMAN v. VISAYAN RAPID TRANSIT CO.

    068 Phil 643

  • G.R. No. 46451 September 30, 1939 - PAZ CHUA v. SECRETARY OF LABOR

    068 Phil 649

  • G.R. No. 46484 September 30, 1939 - SANTIAGO SAMBRANO v. RED LINE TRANSPORTATION CO., INC.

    068 Phil 652

  • G.R. No. 46724 September 30, 1939 - CRESCENCIO REYNES v. ROSALINA BARRERA

    068 Phil 656

  • G.R. No. 46728 September 30, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO MONTENEGRO

    068 Phil 659

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 46725   September 29, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMINO AQUINO<br /><br />068 Phil 615

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 46725. September 29, 1939.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MAXIMINO AQUINO, Defendant-Appellant.

    Eliseo Caunca for Appellant.

    Solicitor-General Ozaeta and Acting Assistant Attorney Torres for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE; HOMICIDE; AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF NIGHTTIME PENALTY. — The crime was correctly qualified as homicide because neither evident premeditation nor treachery was present therein. The first circumstance was not present because it has not been proved that prior to the crime, the accused conceived and planned it and persisted in the idea until the realization thereof. Nor was the second circumstance present because, under the given facts, the aggression which produced the mortal wound was committed while the deceased was face to face with the accused. It is claimed that the aggravating circumstance of nighttime has not been proved and that the indeterminate penalty imposes should be lowered accordingly. The circumstance of nighttime has been correctly appreciated because the accused sought it in order to realize the crime with more ease. As to the penalty imposed, the same is in accordance with article 249 of the Revised Penal Code and with Act No. 4103, as amended by Act No. 4225, on the ground that the aggravating circumstance of nighttime is not offset by any mitigating circumstance.


    D E C I S I O N


    IMPERIAL, J.:


    In criminal case No. 7421 of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, the provincial fiscal filed an information against Pascual de la Cruz’ and Maximino Aquino, charging them with the commission of the crime of murder, for having assaulted and killed Juanito Galvez with a cane and a knife, with evident premeditation and treachery, having furthermore committed said crime in an uninhabited place. Pascual de la Cruz was discharged, having been used as a witness for the prosecution, and the case was dismisses as to him. Maximino Aquino pleaded not guilty, was tried, convicted of the crime of homicide and sentenced to the indeterminate penalty of from ten years of prision correccional to twenty years of reclusion temporal, to the accessory penalties prescribed by law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000 and to pay the costs. From this judgment of conviction, Maximino Aquino appealed.

    At about 8 o’clock in the evening Or May 14, 1938, the accused Maximino Aquino went to look for Pascual de la Cruz in the latter’s house and invited him for a stroll. Upon arriving at the rice field of one Alipio de la Cruz, situated in the barrio of Masalipit of the municipality of San Miguel, Province of Bulacan, Maximino revealed to Pascual that he was going to kill Juanito Galvez. The motive was no other than rivalry, as both Maximino and Juanito were courting a girl by the name of Sagrario de la Cruz, and the seemed to be more inclined to the latter. Another reason for the grudge harbored by Maximino was that on one occasion, he surprised his mistress, Maria de Jesus, flirting with Juanito and this aroused his jealousy. While they were in the rice field, Pascual and Maximino, shortly afterwards, saw a man approaching. Maximino told his companion that said man was Juanito Galvez, and leaving Pascual, he sallied forth to meet Galvez. Maximino and Juanito actually met each other and both walked together. After a few steps, Maximino withdrew from Juanito and with the cudgel or case carried by him, he assaulted and. repeatedly struck him on the head, and immediately afterward stabbed him with the knife which has also carried, inflicting upon him a deep-cutting, transversal wound on the mid-anterior part of the throat, twelve centimeters long and five centimeters wide, with plain and clean-cut borders throughout its entire depth, cutting the skin, the muscles, the trachea, the veins and arteries in the anterior part of the neck, the wound being necessarily mortal; another contused wound three centimeters long on the left cheek bone, which affected the entire thickness of the soft tissue of said region; another contused wound two centimeters long on the right side of the nose, parallel to the nasal duct, cutting the entire thickness of the tissue of said region; and a contusion on the upper right side, crushing the mucous membrane. These wounds and contusion were discovered and described by Dr. Alfredo Lopez, president of the eighth sanitary division of Bulacan, who performed the autopsy on the body of Juanito. As was to be expected, the victim died immediately after the aggression, as a consequence of the necessarily mortal wound above-stated.

    In the first and second assignments of error, it is contended that the evidence for the defense should have been made to prevail over that of the prosecution, for being the more probable, stronger and more convincing. The defense of the accused was made to consist mainly in the proposition that it was Pascual de la Cruz who assaulted Juanito Galvez and caused his death, much stress being laid on the circumstance that Pascual was a discharged coaccused. We have carefully reviewed the evidence and we agree with the court, which has observed all the witnesses testify, that the evidence presented by the prosecution is convincing and excludes the defense interposed by the Accused-Appellant. In addition to the testimony of Pascual de la Cruz, the prosecution has presented circumstantial evidence corroborating the testimony of said witness. Sagrario de la Cruz testified that the accused had really been courting her, but that she rejected him. Consorcia de la Cruz asserted that four days before the crime, the accused had informed her that if the deceased continued to frequent the house of Sagrario de la Cruz, he would kill him. It is possible that Pascual de la Cruz may have agreed to help Maximino realize the crime, but we are satisfied that Maximino was the author of and the one who caused the death of Juanito Galvez. According to the preponderance of all the evidence presented, his guilt has been established beyond all reasonable doubt. The first two assignments of error are without merit.

    In the third assignment of error, it is claimed that the aggravating circumstance of nighttime has not been proved and that the indeterminate penalty imposed should be lowered accordingly. We are of the opinion that the circumstance of nighttime has been correctly appreciated because the accused sought it the better to realize the crime. As to the penalty imposed, the same is in accordance with article 249 of the Revised Penal Code and with Act No. 4103, as amended by Act No. 4225, on the ground that the aggravating circumstance of nighttime is not offset by any mitigating circumstance.

    The crime was correctly qualified as homicide because neither evident premeditation nor treachery was presets therein. The first circumstance was not present because it has not been proved that prior to the crime, the accused conceived and planned it and persisted in the idea until the realization thereof. Nor was the second circumstance present because, under the given facts, the aggression which produced the mortal wound was committed while the deceased was face to face with the accused.

    The last assignment of error merits no further consideration for being a mere corollary of the former ones.

    Inasmuch as the guilt of the accused was proved beyond reasonable doubt and the penalties imposed are in accordance with law, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed, with the costs of this instance to the Accused-Appellant. So ordered.

    Avanceña, C.J., Villa-Real, Diaz, Laurel, Concepcion, and Moran, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. 46725   September 29, 1939 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMINO AQUINO<br /><br />068 Phil 615


    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