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
 

   
April-1949 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1749 April 2, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LUCAS GEMPES

    083 Phil 267

  • G.R. No. L-1441 April 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MIGUEL N. MORENO

    083 Phil 286

  • G.R. No. L-2179 April 12, 1949 - MANILA TRADING petitioner v. MANILA TRADING LABORERS’ ASSN.

    083 Phil 297

  • G.R. No. L-979 April 13, 1949 - COMMONWEALTH OF THE PHIL. v. FAR EASTERN SURETY

    083 Phil 305

  • G.R. No. L-2745 April 13, 1949 - FLAVIANO ROMERO v. POTENCIANO PECSON

    083 Phil 308

  • G.R. No. L-856 April 18, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SUSANO PEREZ

    083 Phil 314

  • G.R. No. L-493 April 19, 1949 - SANTIAGO BANAAG v. VICENTE SINGSON ENCARNACION

    083 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. L-1545 April 19, 1949 - E. R. CRUZ v. RAFAEL DINGLASAN.

    083 Phil 333

  • G.R. No. 48671 April 19, 1949 - EUSEBIO BELVIZ v. CATALINO BUENAVENTURA

    083 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. L-364 April 25, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIANO T. JAUCIAN

    083 Phil 340

  • G.R. No. L-1282 April 25, 1949 - JUAN S. BARROZO v. MARCELINO T. MACARAEG

    083 Phil 378

  • G.R. No. L-2525 April 26, 1949 - MARY BURKE DESBARATS v. TOMAS DE VERA

    083 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. 48676 April 26, 1949 - LEON ORACION v. PACITA JUANILLO

    083 Phil 397

  • G.R. No. L-793 April 27, 1949 - FELISA R. PAEZ v. FRANCISCO MAGNO

    083 Phil 403

  • G.R. No. L-1259 April 27, 1949 - IN RE: CRISANTO DE BORJA v. JULIANA DE BORJA

    083 Phil 405

  • G.R. No. L-1370 April 27, 1949 - BERNARDA DE VASQUEZ v. ALFONSO DIVA

    083 Phil 410

  • G.R. No. L-1399 April 27, 1949 - IN RE: GONZALO T. DAVID v. CARLOS M. SISON

    083 Phil 413

  • G.R. No. L-1590 April 27, 1949 - RAYMUNDA SIVA v. FELIXBERTO IMPERIAL REYES

    083 Phil 416

  • G.R. No. L-1627 April 27, 1949 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. MAMERTO RAMIREZ

    083 Phil 418

  • G.R. No. L-1976 April 27, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARULA

    083 Phil 425

  • G.R. No. L-2056 April 27, 1949 - SANTIAGO ALERIA v. JUAN MENDOZA

    083 Phil 427

  • G.R. No. L-2336 April 27, 1949 - ANGELINA CANAYNAY v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    083 Phil 429

  • CA. No. 2592-R April 27, 1949 - SATURNINA ZAPANTA v. VIRGILIO BARTOLOME

    083 Phil 433

  • G.R. No. L-2612 April 27, 1949 - RURAL PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION v. DOMINADOR TEMPOROSA

    083 Phil 438

  • G.R. No. L-855 April 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TROADIO BUTAWAN

    083 Phil 440

  • G.R. No. L-1275 April 28, 1949 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FULGENCIO BUSTILLOS.

    083 Phil 443

  • G.R. No. L-1661 April 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO CANTOS

    083 Phil 446

  • G.R. No. L-1672 April 28, 1949 - IN RE: ZENAIDA JIRO-MORI

    083 Phil 450

  • G.R. No. L-2028 April 28, 1949 - PHIL. SHEET METAL WORKERS’ UNION v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    083 Phil 453

  • CA. No. 332 April 29, 1949 - CHINA INSURANCE & SURETY COMPANY v. B. K. BERKENKOTTER

    083 Phil 459

  • G.R. No. L-1650 April 29, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GORGONIO MACABUHAY

    083 Phil 464

  • G.R. No. L-2899 April 29, 1949 - NATIONAL COCONUT CORPORATION v. FRANCISCO GERONIMO

    083 Phil 467

  • G.R. No. L-150 April 30, 1949 - VICENTE HILADO v. FELIX DE LA COSTA

    083 Phil 471

  • G.R. No. L-1234 April 30, 1949 - VICTORINO FLORO v. SANTIAGO H. GRANADA

    083 Phil 487

  • G.R. No. L-1383 April 30, 1949 - PAZ ESCARELLA DE RALLA v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    083 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-1523 April 30, 1949 - BIÑAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY v. FIDEL IBAÑEZ

    083 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. L-1783 April 30, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO CARPIO Y ESTACIO

    083 Phil 509

  • G.R. No. L-1916 April 30, 1949 - PABLO C. SIBULO v. LOPE ALTAR

    083 Phil 513

  • G.R. No. L-2009 April 30, 1949 - SUNRIPE COCONUT PRODUCTS CO. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    083 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. L-2122 April 30, 1949 - FAUSTINO BUTER v. TRIBUNAL DE RELACIONES INDUSTRIALES

    083 Phil 526

  • G.R. No. L-46798 April 30, 1949 - PINDANGAN AGRICULTURAL CO., INC. v. ERNEST A. SCHENKEL Y OTRO

    083 Phil 529

  • G.R. No. 49167 April 30, 1949 - CO TAO v. JOAQUIN CHAN CHICO

    083 Phil 543

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-1976   April 27, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARULA<br /><br />083 Phil 425

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-1976. April 27, 1949.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARULA (Moro) (alias AGAPITO ARULA, alias ARULA AGAPITO), Defendant-Appellant.

    Jimenez B. Buendia, for Appellant.

    Assistant Solicitor General Manuel P. Barcelona and Solicitor Antonio A. Torres for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    CRIMINAL LAW; TREASON; EVIDENCE; MERE DENIALS AND ALLEGATION OF DURESS ARE INSUFFICIENT AS DEFENSE. — Mere denials of defendant, unsupported by other evidence, cannot in the least chip the clear and overwhelming case of the prosecution. Likewise, the allegation of duress and recourse to the exculpatory benefits of the law which rest merely on the word of defendant himself, cannot overcome the clear, logical and truthful testimonies of the witnesses of the prosecution whose accounts of the tragedy prove the voluntary participation of the defendant in the entire chain of events.


    D E C I S I O N


    MORAN, C.J. :


    From the judgment of conviction by the People’s Court of Zamboanga finding Arula (Moro) alias Arula Agapito, alias Agapito Arula, guilty of the crime of treason and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of death, to pay a fine of P20,000, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Moro Amin in the sum of P2,000, and to pay the costs, defendant Arula appeals to this Court.

    Arula admitted his Filipino citizenship during the trial.

    During the period of Japanese occupation, in Tetuan, Zamboanga, there was an organization known as the Tetuan Volunteer Guards dedicated to helping and serving the Japanese Army. This organization was first commanded by a certain Roman Miguel and later by one Bruno Soriano when the former was killed in an encounter with the guerrilla forces. Arula was a member of this organization and on many occasions he accompanied Bruno Soriano and his followers. This was proven by the testimonies of three witnesses, namely, Jose Mendoza, Filomeno Gregorio and Filomeno Enriquez.

    On February 24, 1943, at about noon, a certain Moro Amin, with his face profusely bleeding, was brought by one Boy Abrera in a calesa owned and driven by Filomeno Enriquez, to the San Bernardino Bridge in Tetuan where Bruno Soriano and his men were waiting, including defendant Arula. From there the group took Moro Amin to a nearby jackfruit tree where a pit had been dug. Moro Amin was then questioned for information regarding a guerrilla officer by the name of Lt. Celso Fernandez. When Amin disclaimed having any information, defendant Arula pushed him into the pit and fired at him twice with a rifle. Then Bruno Soriano also fired his revolver at Amin. Amin died inside the pit and his body was covered with earth. These facts have been established by the testimonies of Jose Mendoza, who witnessed the entire incident from the window of his house about 50 yards away; of Filomeno Gregorio, who had been taken along by Bruno Soriano’s group and who saw the killing of Amin from a distance of about 50 meters, of Filomeno Enriquez, some sort of member and courier of the Japanese and Soriano’s organization, who drove the calesa which took Amin to where Soriano and his men were waiting and who was about six or seven meters away during the killing; and above all, by the testimony of defendant Arula himself during the trial, who admitted the veracity of the bare facts of the occurrence.

    The defendant, who was the only witness for his defense, denies having been a member of the Tetuan Volunteer Guards and claims that the shots which killed Moro Amin were not those fired by him but by Bruno Soriano. These mere denials of defendant, unsupported by other evidence, cannot in the least chip the clear and overwhelming case of the prosecution. However, the main point of the defense lies in the allegation of duress and recourse to the exculpatory benefits of sections 5 and 6 of article 12 of the Revised Penal Code. Again, on this point, the defense rests merely on the word of defendant himself, as against the clear, logical and truthful testimonies of the witnesses of the prosecution whose accounts of the tragedy prove the voluntary participation of the defendant in the entire chain of events.

    In view of all the foregoing, the judgment of conviction by the People’s Court is affirmed, but the sentence of death is modified to life imprisonment due to the absence of sufficient votes on the imposition of the capital punishment; and the indemnity to the heirs of the deceased Moro Amin is raised to P6,000 as recommended by the Office of the Solicitor General, with costs against Appellant.

    Paras, Feria, Pablo, Perfecto, Bengzon, Briones, Tuason, Montemayor and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. L-1976   April 27, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARULA<br /><br />083 Phil 425


    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