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-1949 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-406 January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO GARCIA

    082 Phil 496

  • G.R. No. L-1449 January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE DOSAL, ET AL.

    082 Phil 501

  • G.R. No. L-1656 January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMAN VILO

    082 Phil 524

  • G.R. No. L-1838 January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EXEQUIEL LACANLALE

    082 Phil 536

  • G.R. No. L-1874 January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELECIO MEJIAS

    082 Phil 541

  • G.R. No. L-2327 January 11, 1949 - CANUTO F. PIMENTEL v. PEDRO FESTEJO

    082 Phil 545

  • G.R. No. L-1607 January 12, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ATANACIO FIGUIEROA

    082 Phil 559

  • G.R. Nos. L-1846-48 January 18, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO REYES, ET AL.

    082 Phil 563

  • G.R. No. L-1591 January 20, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONRADO REFUERZO

    082 Phil 576

  • In re VICENTE SOTTO, for contempt of court : January 21, 1949 - 082 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. L-365 January 21, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO RACAZA

    082 Phil 623

  • G.R. No. L-1278 January 21, 1949 - LORETO BARRIOQUINTO, ET AL. v. ENRIQUE A. FERNANDEZ, ET AL

    082 Phil 642

  • G.R. No. L-1369 January 21, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL VALENCIA

    082 Phil 657

  • G.R. No. L-1187 January 25, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUFRACIO LANSANG

    082 Phil 662

  • G.R. No. L-1288 January 25, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JACINTO PINEDA

    082 Phil 668

  • G.R. No. L-1561 January 25, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE CADA

    082 Phil 671

  • G.R. No. L-2456 January 25, 1949 - NICOLAS B. POTOT v. JUAN L. BAGANO, ET AL.

    082 Phil 679

  • G.R. No. L-986 January 26, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIX ALCOVER

    082 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. L-1620 January 26, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUPERTO ARANGUREN, ET AL.

    082 Phil 696

  • G.R. No. L-300 January 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FILOMENO CASTRO

    082 Phil 706

  • G.R. No. L-1481 January 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUGENIO ABENDAN, ET AL.

    082 Phil 711

  • G.R. No. L-1547 January 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO BATE

    082 Phil 716

  • G.R. No. L-1653 January 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE TUMANDAO

    082 Phil 723

  • G.R. No. L-1677 January 28, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CIRILO HUMARANG

    082 Phil 737

  • G.R. Nos. L-1642-44 January 29, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO MENDIOLA, ET AL.

    082 Phil 740

  • G.R. No. L-2186 January 29, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN BULATAO

    082 Phil 753

  • G.R. No. L-2417 January 29, 1949 - DALMACIO CELINO v. ALEJANDRO BAUTISTA

    082 Phil 756

  • G.R. No. L-1805 January 31, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN ALBANO

    082 Phil 767

  • G.R. No. L-2007 January 31, 1949 - WILLIAM CHIONGBIAN v. ALFREDO DE LEON, ET AL.

    082 Phil 771

  • G.R. No. L-2676 January 31, 1949 - LI KIM THO v. GO SIU KAO, ET AL.

    082 Phil 776

  • R-CA-No. 9871 January 31, 1949 - ANTONIO AUSTRIA v. JOSE E. LAUREL, ET AL.

    082 Phil 780

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-1838   January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EXEQUIEL LACANLALE<br /><br />082 Phil 536

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-1838. January 7, 1949.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EXEQUIEL LACANLALE, Defendant-Appellant.

    Jose S. Sarte for Appellant.

    Assistant Solicitor General Inocencio Rosal and Solicitor Lucas Lacson for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CRIMINAL LAW; TREASON; ACCUSED’S EXCESSIVE TREASONOUS BEHAVIOR, BARBARISM AND BRUTALITIES AGAINST HIS COUNTRYMEN DO NOT SQUARE WITH HIS PLEA THAT HE WAS WITH THE GUERRILLAS. — The defendant’s alleged saving of some of his townmates from arrest and obtaining the release of others are too trivial to counteract the treasonous inferences deduceable from his excesses. His overbearing behavior and barbarism do not square with his professed purpose of fraternizing with the Japanese to elicit secret information from them. His brutalities only exposed too clearly an all-out, unconcealed loyalty to his masters who must have derived no little comfort and satisfaction from his assistance. He set about his task in a workmanlike fashion and displayed manifest enthusiasm and seeming pride in his diabolical performance. His aggressiveness and impetuosity had earned for him the unsavory sobriquet "Dumog." Persistent and long-continued tortures and killings of guerrillas and guerrilla suspects do not tie up with the plea that he was in secret league with a guerrilla organization. There were patriotic people who feigned collaboration with the invaders as a mask for a great cause, but we heard of no one who had to use as trappings fearful beatings and murders of the very people whose cause he pretended to advance.

    2. ID.; ID.; ID. — Defendant’s showing for his "lofty" efforts and adventures were agonies and deaths. He cannot get away with these treasonous crimes by the simple expedient of seeking refuge behind lip patriotism in the hours of reckoning.


    D E C I S I O N


    TUASON, J.:


    Exequiel Lacanlale was prosecuted in the People’s Court, charged with treason on eight counts. The prosecution introduced evidence only on the first four counts, the rest having been abandoned. The trial court pronounced the defendant guilty and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties and to pay a fine of P10,000 and the costs.

    The four charges which were pushed through are to the effect that during the Japanese Military occupation, in the Province of Pampanga, the accused served as agent of the Imperial Japanese Forces, and that on or about March 22, 1944, in the municipality of Arayat, Province of Pampanga, he arrested Capt. Jose M. Tinio, Filemon Pascual and Nicolas Dizon for being guerrillas or for guerrilla activities and maltreated the prisoners.

    These charges have been substantiated by the testimony of two or more eye-witnesses. Other overt acts of the same character have also been established. Although the latter acts are not averred in the information, they are nonetheless material as proofs of adherence to the enemy and help to rebut the appellant’s defense that his collaboration was a sham.

    Following are the salient points in the evidence against the appellant:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    On March 22, 1944, Japanese troops with the accused, who was carrying a cowhide, picked up at their homes about fifteen residents of Arayat and marched them to the local Japanese headquarters. Jose M. Tinio was one of the persons arrested. Addressing him "You," the accused asked him if he knew Jose Nuguid. When he said he did not, the defendant twice punched him with the hard end of his strap on the stomach. Lacanlale gave the prisoners a lecture and said that the good Lacanlale was dead but the bad Lacanlale was alive. The accused left after the lecture but soon came back, held Escolastico Salak, one of the prisoners, by the hair and knocked Salak’s head against the concrete wall. Then he kicked Salak with the toes of his shoes on the stomach. Salak reeled on the floor and, as he was sprawled writhing in pain, the accused stepped on his breast with all his weight. Later, he stepped on Salak’s neck and kicked him on the lips. Salak moved to the side of the wall and leaned against it whimpering and groaning. The accused left but afterward returned and asked Salak if he had enough. Salak did not answer and the accused held Salak’s fingers and sarcastically said that they were nice fingers, good for pulling gun triggers. Then the accused told Salak to put his forefinger flat on the floor and knocked it twice with the butt of his .45-caliber pistol, smashing it. From Salak, the accused turned his attention to Captain Tinio and whacked the latter on the head.

    Filemon Pascual, another prisoner was hit by the accused with his whip.

    Leon Ramirez, also a prisoner, received a strong blow on the chest from Lacanlale.

    Nicolas Dizon on being seized from his house greeted Lacanlale with "Good morning, Mr. Lacanlale." Defendant answered, "What good morning," squeezed Dizon’s neck, and struck him with his cowhide or a piece of guava wood in the stomach and on the back, knocking him down.

    Romeo Espino was "jiu-jitsued" by Lacanlale. Before Espino was brutally tortured by the Japanese the accused asked him if he knew Casto Alejandrino and when he said no, the accused told him that he had better tell the truth or he, the accused, would kill him.

    On February 8, 1944, the Japanese with the accused herded about 200 people to the chapel in barrio Lamit. Lacanlale read a list of persons who were wanted. Three of these persons were in the chapel. These three were taken out by Lacanlale and no one knew what happened to them except that their cries were heard. Later, Lacanlale came back to the chapel and picked out eight more people, whom he likewise took outside. Only three of the eleven victims were seen alive after that.

    The appellant’s brief does not dispute the truth of the foregoing facts but alleges that his collaboration was a mere front used to help the guerrillas. He has made only one assignment of error which is confined to the discussion of his motives.

    The accused has not adduced reliable evidence to prove his alleged connection with the underground. His evidence comprises the testimony of two witnesses both of whom are his townmates.

    Querubin D. Basilio, then a captain in the United States Army, stated that the defendant was a co-organizer of a guerrilla unit, according to his information. And Marcelino Bustos testified that the accused was a sergeant in the Luzon Guerrilla Forces in 1942; that the said accused was arrested by Japanese in Manila, whereupon he (witness), on instruction of one guerrilla Captain Hernandez, contacted the defendant and told him to remain with the Japanese. He further said that in 1943, after the defendant had been captured, the witness and others would have been caught in a cockpit by Japanese troops had not the defendant informed them, through the occupation mayor’s brother, that the Japanese were coming to search them; and that in 1944 many people suspected as guerrillas were arrested but through the help of Lacanlale were released.

    Basilio’s testimony is hearsay. And no tangible evidence has been presented to corroborate Bustos’. The defendant’s membership in the guerrilla forces, if it had existed, could have been proven in a more substantial manner by the testimony of more trustworthy witnesses possessing a neutral and disinterested background. Assuming Bustos’ veracity, his testimony does not preclude the hypothesis that the appellant shifted his allegiance, and with a vengeance. The defendant himself announced to the prisoners that he was no longer the good, loyal Lacanlale they had known.

    For the rest, the defendant’s alleged saving of some of his townmates from arrest and obtaining the release of others are too trivial to counteract the treasonous inferences deduceable from his excesses. His overbearing behaviour and barbarism do not square with his professed purpose of fraternizing with the Japanese to elicit secret information from them. His brutalities only exposed too clearly an all-out, unconcealed loyalty to his masters who must have derived no little comfort and satisfaction from his assistance. He set about his task in a workmanlike fashion and displayed manifest enthusiasm and seeming pride in his diabolical performance. His aggressiveness and impetuosity had earned for him the unsavory sobriquet "Dumog." Persistent and long-continued tortures and killings of guerrillas and guerrilla suspects do not tie up with the plea that he was in secret league with a guerrilla organization. There were patriotic people who feigned collaboration with the invaders as a mask for a great cause, but we heard of no one who had to use as trappings fearful beatings and murders of the very people whose cause he pretended to advance.

    In fine, the net results of defendant’s showing of his "lofty" efforts and adventures were agonies and deaths. He cannot get away with these treasonous crimes by the simple expedient of seeking refuge behind lip patriotism in the hours of reckoning.

    We are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant is guilty of treason as charged. The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed with costs against the Appellant.

    Moran, C.J., Paras, Feria, Pablo, Perfecto and Bengzon, JJ., concur.

    Moran, C.J., I certify that Mr. Justice Briones voted for the affirmance of the judgment.

    G.R. No. L-1838   January 7, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EXEQUIEL LACANLALE<br /><br />082 Phil 536


    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