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-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-2265 April 1, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO RAFALLO, ET AL

    086 Phil 22

  • G.R. No. L-2618 April 1, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS vs.FLORENTINO PEREMNE

    086 Phil 31

  • G.R. No. L-3024 April 1, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LAZARO ALBAR

    086 Phil 36

  • G.R. No. L-1698 April 8, 1950 - MARIANO GRANADOS v. CELEDONIO MONTON

    086 Phil 42

  • G.R. No. L-1867 April 8, 1950 - CARMEN DE LA PAZ VDA. DE ONGSIAKO v. TEODORICO GAMBOA,ET AL

    086 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. L-820 April 11, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO ALVERO

    086 Phil 58

  • G.R. No. 1753 April 12, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FAUSTINO A. ESTEFA

    086 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. L-2489 April 12, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONRADO EVANGELISTA ET AL.

    086 Phil 112

  • G.R. No. L-1717 April 17, 1950 - JUANA MANLINCON v. MAGNO DE VERA, ET AL

    086 Phil 115

  • G.R. No. L-2438 April 17, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FAUSTO LACAYA

    086 Phil 118

  • G.R. No. L-2266 April 17, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR BAYTAN and JESUS BAYTAN

    086 Phil 126

  • G.R. No. L-2255 April 18, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HIGINO SIGUE

    086 Phil 132

  • G.R. No. L-2858 April 19, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FELIPE VISTA

    086 Phil 140

  • G.R. No. L-1807 April 20, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DY TOO, ET AL

    086 Phil 146

  • G.R. No. L-2205 April 20, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANASTACIO REYES

    086 Phil 153

  • G.R. No. L-2433 April 20, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GENARO GUCOR ET AL.

    086 Phil 157

  • G.R. No. L-2254 April 20, 1950 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. VICENTE O. DEL ROSARIO and NATALIO B. BACALSO

    086 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. L-333 April 21, 1950 - JOSE G. CUAYCONG ET AL. v. RAMON S. RIUS

    086 Phil 170

  • G.R. No. L-2325 Abril, 21, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. MARCOS DUCO, ET AL

    086 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. L-2879 April 21, 1950 - MIGUEL SOCCO REYES v. POTENCIANO PECSON, ET AL

    086 Phil 181

  • G.R. No. L-2390 April 24, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BALDERA, ET AL

    086 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. L-2523 April 24, 1950 - FELIPE C. ALVIAR ET AL. v. REV. LEO A. CULLUM

    086 Phil 193

  • G.R. No. L-2833 April 24, 1950 - JUAN URIARTE Y HERMANOS v. JOSE TEODORO, ET AL

    086 Phil 196

  • G.R. No. L-2232 April 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AGATON MARTIN

    086 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. L-2233 April 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TIMOTEO TAMAYO

    086 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. L-222 April 26, 1950 - SALVACION F. VDA. DE EDUQUE v. JOSE M. OCAMPO

    086 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. L-2082 April 26, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NEMESIO LLANETA, ET AL

    086 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. L-2154 April 26, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO OTADORA ET AL.

    086 Phil 244

  • G.R. No. L-2279 April 26, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEOPOLDO ZABALA, ET AL

    086 Phil 251

  • G.R. No. L-2623 April 26, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO BANAYAD

    086 Phil 259

  • G.R. No. L-2649, April 26, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. SEGUNDO O. PINEDA, ET AL

    086 Phil 266

  • G.R. No. L-2866 April 26, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. PEDRO O. MACASO

    086 Phil 272

  • G.R. No. L-1733 April 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GABINO R. TUASON

    086 Phil 278

  • G.R. No. L-1914 April 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO LINCUNA, ET AL

    086 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. L-2054 April 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE VILLAMORA ET AL.

    086 Phil 287

  • G.R. No. L-2080 April 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. POLICARPIO RUIZ, ET AL

    086 Phil 293

  • G.R. No. L-2185 April 29, 1950 - PASTOR PACCIAL v. MARIA O. PALERMO

    086 Phil 297

  • G.R. No. L-2604 April 29, 1950 - PHIL. NEWSPAPER GUILD, ET AL v. EVENING NEWS, INC.

    086 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. L-2771 April 29, 1950 - ALFONSO UMALI v. PRIMITIVO LOVINA

    086 Phil 313

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-2205   April 20, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANASTACIO REYES<br /><br />086 Phil 153

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-2205. April 20, 1950.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANASTACIO REYES, Defendant-Appellant.

    P.A. Revilla and N. Y. Fuentes for Appellant.

    First Assistant Solicitor General Roberto A. Gianzon and Solicitor Jose P. Alejandro for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CRIMINAL LAW; TREASON; EVIDENCE; ALIBI AS A DEFENSE. — The accused puts up the defense of alibi, claiming that during the whole year of 1942, he was employed in the carriage factory of his employer and the latter was introduced as a defense witness to support said theory, Held: That said defense should be rejected not only because the witnesses for the prosecution assured the court that they had seen the accused acting as a member of the Japanese Military Police and helping said organization in the apprehension of Filipino guerrillas, but also because said witness for the defense in his statement stated that when the Japanese occupied Pasig, the accused left the factory and joined the Japanese Kempei Tai and even demanded the surrender of and confiscated the pistol kept by his employer.


    D E C I S I O N


    MONTEMAYOR, J.:


    In the People’s Court Anastacio Reyes was accused of treason under four counts. During the trial the prosecution presented evidence only on counts 1 and 3. After trial, he was found guilty only of count No. 3 and was sentenced to reclusión perpetua, to pay a fine of P10,000, and to pay the costs. He is appealing from that decision.

    Before the war Anastacio Reyes joined the Sakdal party which was later converted into the Ganap party. When the Japanese forces arrived in Rizal province, he joined the Japanese Kempei Tai or military police, wore blue denim as a uniform together with his fellow Filipino soldiers who had joined the Japanese military police, carried a revolver and used to accompany Japanese patrols and raiding parties. In open court he admitted that he was then and is now a Filipino citizen.

    For purposes of reference we are reproducing the third count:red:chanrobles.com.ph

    "3. — In or about July 1942, in Taytay, Rizal, said accused did then and there cooperate in the capture of Santiago Morales, Antonio Candelaria, Antonio La Torre, Benjamin Santos, Agustin Andres, Rosendo Marcelo, Santos Francisco and the killing of Teofilo Molano for guerrilla activities.."

    Although the People’s Court found that the accused participated in the arrest of Santiago Morales, Antonio Candelaria, Antonio La Torre, Benjamin Santos, Agustin Andres, Rosendo Marcelo and Santos Francisco, we are inclined to agree with the Solicitor General in his contention that there is no sufficient proof of the participation of the accused in the arrest of the seven persons abovementioned, with the exception of Rosendo Marcelo and Santos Francisco, and that, furthermore, complying with the two-witness rule in treason cases, the arrest of Rosendo Marcelo only, can be charged against the appellant. Santos Francisco was the only witness who testified as to his own arrest, which was effected by four Japanese soldiers and seven Filipinos, including appellant Reyes, belonging to the United Nippon, an association organized to aid the Japanese. The raiding party took Santos Francisco to the house of Rosendo Marcelo, for the latter was also arrested by the same raiding party. This arrest of Rosendo Marcelo was testified to by both Santos Francisco and Rosendo Marcelo, thereby complying with the two-witness rule. Francisco and Marcelo were taken to the municipal building of Taytay, where they found other prisoners, the five men already mentioned, namely: Santiago Morales, Antonio Candelaria, Antonio La Torre, Benjamin Santos and Agustin Andres. From the presidencia of Taytay the seven prisoners were taken in a truck to the Kempei Tai Headquarters in Pasig and later to the municipal jail where they were kept; and it is said that for about a week they were given no food.

    After about two months confinement the seven prisoners were taken to the barrio of Munson, to a place where a big hole had already been dug. There, five of the prisoners were executed by the Japanese by gunfire. Only Santos Francisco and Rosendo Marcelo were spared and, after being lectured to and threatened that if they did not keep away from the guerrillas, they would suffer the same fate as their fellow prisoners, they were released. But there is no proof that the accused was present and formed part of the Japanese force that did the killing.

    There is no question that Santos and Marcelo were arrested because they were then guerrillas and suspected if not known as such. Previous to their arrest, a Japanese patrol had a skirmish with guerrilla forces and the Japanese were able to confiscate a list of guerrilla members, where the names of Santos and Marcelo appeared. There is also evidence to show that sometime in July, 1942, about thirty Filipino soldiers, including defendant Reyes, all members of the United Nippon, went to the barrio of Bangyad, Taytay, to arrest some guerrillas who were supposed to be buying fish. They were surrounded but one named Teofilo Molano tried to escape. He was fired upon and killed. The killing of Molano was fully established by several witnesses but the presence of the accused on that occasion is established only by a written statement (Exhibit G) given before the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) of the United States Army, wherein he stated that he formed part of the patrol and that they fired at Molano because he was trying to escape. The office of the Solicitor General claims that although this does not satisfy the two-witness rule, nevertheless, it should be considered inasmuch as this does not in fact prove treason but only serves to aggravate the commission thereof.

    The accused puts up the defense of alibi, claiming that during the whole year of 1942, he was employed in the carriage factory of his employer Latino Guevarra and the latter was introduced to support said theory. The People’s Court rightly rejected this claim not only because the witnesses for the prosecution assured the court that they had seen the accused acting as a member of the Japanese Military Police and helping said organization in the apprehension of Filipino guerrillas, but also because witness Guevarra himself in his statement (Exhibit H) stated therein that when the Japanese occupied Pasig, the accused left the factory and joined the Japanese Kempei Tai and even demanded the surrender of and confiscated the pistol which Guevarra kept. Furthermore, some of the very witnesses presented by the defense partly corroborated the theory of the prosecution about appellant’s adherence to the Japanese and his part in apprehending guerrillas. Juan Antonio, a major in the Marking Fil-American Guerrilla, testifying for the defense, said that appellant Reyes was a Makapili, and Serafin Hernandez, a First Lieutenant of the ROTC Hunters of the underground movement, said that he (Hernandez) being a guerrilla, avoided the accused because he feared him.

    In conclusion, we find the guilt of the accused established beyond reasonable doubt. Although the Solicitor General recommends the imposition of the death penalty, we agree with the People’s Court that said accused will be sufficiently punished with the penalty of reclusión perpetua imposed upon him. The decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs.

    Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    MORAN, C. J. : .

    Mr. Justice Paras and Mr. Justice Padilla voted for affirmance.

    Judgment affirmed.

    G.R. No. L-2205   April 20, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANASTACIO REYES<br /><br />086 Phil 153


    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