Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1903 > March 1903 Decisions > G.R. No. 948 March 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MACARIO CALLOTES

002 Phil 16:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 948. March 9, 1903. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. MACARIO CALLOTES, Defendant-Appellant.

Catalino Arevalo for Appellant.

Solicitor-General Araneta for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; ROBBERY. — In the absence of evidence to show how the defendants effected an entrance into a convent which they robbed, there can be no conviction under article 508 of the Penal Code.

2. ID.; ID. — One who admits that he was with a band of robbery at the commission of a robbery, but claims to have been sequestrated by them, must support his defense by strong evidence, especially when the evidence discloses that he was permitted to carry a revolver.


D E C I S I O N


LADD, J. :


The evidence shows that on the evening of September 11, 1901, six armed men entered the convent of the pueblo of Bagoc, Bataan, intimidated the family of Calixto Tiangco, who was living in the convent at the time, and took and carried away a small sum of money, a revolver, some provisions, and other articles belonging to Tiangco, and a hat which belonged to Ildefonso Batol.

The defendant admits that he was with the bandits when the convent was robbed, but claims that he had been sequestrated by them.

Batol’s hat was found in the possession of the defendant when he was arrested. He says he took it from one of the bandits when he separated from the band. he also admits that he had a revolver, which was given to him by Isidro Mendigoren, the leader of the band, and which he turned over to one Munti from whom it appears to have been recovered by the inspectors. It does not appear whether or not this revolver was the one taken from the convent.

The defense of sequestration is a familiar one in these cases, and is of such a character as not to be entitled to much consideration unless supported by stront evidence. Not only is there here no evidence that the defendant was an involuntary member of the band, except his own assertion to that effect, but the circumstance that the leader of the band allowed him to carry a revolver strongly discredits any such theory. We can entertain no doubt as to the defendant’s guilt.

There was no evidence as to how the bandits effected an entrance into the convent. The conviction under article 508 of the Code can not, therefore, be supported. The defendant is convicted of the crime defined in No. 5 of article 503 in connection with article 504, with the aggravating circumstance of article 10, No. 20, and the penalty fixed at ten years of presidio mayor, with costs. In other respects the judgment is affirmed, and the cause will be returned to the Court of First Instance for the execution thereof. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Cooper, Willard and Mapa, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1903 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1000 March 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. CARLOS SANTIAGO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 6

  • G.R. No. 1025 March 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO PLANA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 9

  • G.R. No. 955 March 7, 1903 - RAMON CHAVES v. RAMON NERY LINAN

    002 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. 948 March 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MACARIO CALLOTES

    002 Phil 16

  • G.R. No. 1042 March 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. EXEQUIEL CASTILLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 17

  • G.R. No. 866 March 11, 1903 - UNlTED STATES v. APOLONIO SAMSON

    002 Phil 20

  • G.R. No. 1030 March 11, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS TIQUIO, ET AL

    002 Phil 21

  • G.R. No. 453 March 12, 1903 - ANTONIO VENTURA v. PAUL A. MILLER

    002 Phil 22

  • G.R. No. 911 March 12, 1903 - MAXIMO CORTES v. JOSE PALANCA YU-TIBO

    002 Phil 24

  • G.R. No. 559 March 14, 1903 - MANUEL B. BARRIOS v. MARIA PASCUALA DOLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. 1021 March 14, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO LESCANO

    002 Phil 47

  • G.R. No. 1101 March 16, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. ISAAC BAILOSES

    002 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. 893 March 18, 1903 - I. O. CONCHEGULL v. JOSEPH B. HYAMS

    002 Phil 51

  • G.R. No. 1010 March 19, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN FERIA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 54

  • G.R. No. 1099 March 19, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL NAVARRO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 58

  • G.R. No. 1228 March 19, 1903 - JUAN ARANETA v. HEIRS OF TRANQUILINO GUSTILO

    002 Phil 60

  • G.R. No. 1017 March 21, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. GUILLERMO VILLANUEVA

    002 Phil 61

  • G.R. No. 1046 March 21, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX MANALANG

    002 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. 1047 March 24, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN DE CASTRO

    002 Phil 67

  • G.R. No. 1060 March 26, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. GUILLERMO LAUREAGA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 71

  • G.R. No. 1251 March 27, 1903 - FRANK MEKIN v. GEORGE N. WOLFE

    002 Phil 74

  • G.R. No. 1006 March 30, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. NAZARIO ALHAMBRA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 80

  • G.R. No. 1034 March 31, 1903 - DOMINGO S. HERNAEZ v. W. F. NORRIS

    002 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. 1093 March 31, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO MERIN

    002 Phil 88

  • G.R. No. 1114 March 31, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. BARTOLOME OSTREA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 93