Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1903 > May 1903 Decisions > G.R. No. 1292 May 5, 1903 - MARCELINO DE LA CRUZ v. GEO N. WOLFE

002 Phil 184:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 1292. May 5, 1903. ]

MARCELINO DE LA CRUZ, Petitioner-Appellee, v. GEO N. WOLFE, Warden of Bilibid Prison, Respondent-Appellant.

Solicitor-General Araneta for Appellant.

Thomas D. Aitken for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. HABEAS CORPUS; CRIMINAL. LAW. — where a judgment of conviction has been reversed on appeal and new charges against the defendant have been filed in accordance with the direction of the appellate court, the defendant is properly and legally held in custody to answer said charges although he has not been informed thereof.


D E C I S I O N


McDONOUGH, J. :


The petitioner, Marcelino de la Cruz, alleges that he is deprived of his liberty and illegally detained in Bilibid Prison.

It appears from the petition in this proceeding, the return of the warden of the prison, the undisputed statement of facts at the hearing and the records of this court, that on or about February 11, 1900, a band of ladrones landed on the north beach of San Roque, Province of Cavite, and were joined by one other at that place, and that the petitioner, Marcelino de la Cruz, was one of the party. They proceeded with force and arms to rob the houses of several persons, and while engaged in the commission of these crimes four boys, the oldest 16 years, who were returning from fishing, passed the gang, and, recognizing one of them, one of the boys asked that they were doing. The answer was a blow which felled the boy to the ground almost senseless. Subsequently, seeing that they were recognized the ladrones caught three of the boys and bound their arms; they also seized and bound one Pedro Valerio, and then marched their four prisoners to the beach, and, placing them in a banca, all embarked save two of the ladrones, one of whom was the petitioner, Marcelino de la Cruz (also called Maximo de la Cruz), and the banca was pulled out into the bay. when at a point seemingly half way between Manila and Cavite, the ladrones threw their prisoners overboard and the three boys were drowned, Pedro Vale Rio saving himself by swimming, having succeeded in working his arms out of the rattan that bound them.

On the 27th of February, the commanding officer of the district reported that he had arrested Maximo de la Cruz (the petitioner herein), one of the supposed authors of the crime, whereupon it was ordered by the adjutant-general of the department of the Pacific and Eighth Army Corps that the matter he referred to the Court of First Instance of Cavite, with delivery of the prisoner, in order that he might be criminal prosecuted, the military authorities in the meantime to guard the prisoner.

The Court of First Instance of Cavite took cognizance of the case March 13, 1900, and on the 16th of March, after declaring the accused, in conformity with the old procedure, charged with the crime of robbery and triple murder, ordered, on the same date, that he be remanded and notified of the charges against him.

The cause being continued, on the 18th of May, 1900, judgment was rendered adjudging the accused, Marcelino de la Cruz, guilty of gang robbery and triple murder, and he was sentenced to imprisonment for life, and notified of such sentence on June 2, 1900. As there was no suitable and safe place of imprisonment in Cavite, authority was given by Major-General Bates, commander of the department, to send the prisoner to Bilibid Prison for the imprisonment for which he was sentenced by the court, and the prisoner, Marcelino de la Cruz, was confined in said prison July 24, 1900, pursuant to said judgment of conviction and said order, and has ever since remained in said prison.

The case was taken to the Supreme Court en consulta, and on the hearing the fiscal asked that the sentence of the court below be declared void for reason of the insufficiency of proof, and requested that the case be sent back to the Court of First Instance. The criminal department of the Supreme Court, on the 27th of June, 1900, entered a decree declaring the sentence of the lower court of no effect and directing that a certified copy of the order, together with the opinion of the ministerio fiscal, be returned to the lower court in order time the judge should comply With the views of the fiscal, and proceed in conformity, as Much as possible, with the new law of procedure, section 110, General Orders, No. 58.

In compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court, the case was again taken up by the lower court, and two complaints were made against the prisoner, one for the Crime of robbery and the other for the crime of triple murder, in accordance with the requirements of section 110, General Orders, No. 58, but without the accused being informed of said complaints.

In March, 1901, the Court of First Instance of Cavite decided that it had no jurisdiction to heal and determine the charges made in the said complaints, holding that the came within the jurisdiction of the military authorities, and ordered that the entire proceedings be sent to the commanding general of the district, after previously notifying the secretary of the criminal department of the Supreme Court of such action.

The commander of the Department of Luzon having, received the complaints, etc., forwarded the same to the secretary to the military governor of the Islands, in order that he should give his Opinion as to the most expeditions manner of proceeding therein. The secretary in turn, by indorsement of May 8, 1901, forwarded the causes to the President of the Supreme the Court for such action as should he deemed best, calling his attention to the fact that although there was no doubt of the incompetency of the Court of First Instance in the charges of robbery, with respect to the charge of murder pending against the prisoner, it should be prosecuted in said court as there was no law prohibiting it from exercising jurisdiction in such case.

The original papers are in the records of the Supreme Court, but doubtless due to the reorganization of the court, no action was taken on the question submitted by the secretary to the military governor, and the petitioner remains in Bilibid Prison, freed front the judgment of imprisonment for life, but still under the two charges of robbery and murder, and is properly held in custody to answer to said charges, the prosecution or disposal of which should be made without further delay.

In view of these facts the judgment of the lower court should be reversed and the petitioner Marcelino de la Cruz, remanded to the custody of the warden of Bilibid. Judgment will be entered accordingly.

Torres, Copper, Willard and Ladd, JJ., concur.

Arellano, C.J., did not sit in this case.




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






May-1903 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1096 May 5, 1903 - MARTIN BALATBAT v. VALENTIN TANJUTCO

    002 Phil 182

  • G.R. No. 1292 May 5, 1903 - MARCELINO DE LA CRUZ v. GEO N. WOLFE

    002 Phil 184

  • G.R. No. 1072 May 6, 1903 - MANUEL ABELLO v. SEÑORA PAZ KOCK DE MONASTERIO

    002 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 1102 May 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE TENGCO

    002 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. 1234 May 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. E. S. LEWIS

    002 Phil 193

  • G.R. No. 1053 May 7, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MAMERTO VARGAS, ET AL.

    002 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 1014 May 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL REPOLLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 195

  • G.R. No. 1076 May 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JACINTO MARTINEZ, ET AL.

    002 Phil 199

  • G.R. No. 49 May 11, 1903 - MUN. OF ANTIPOLO v. COMMUNITY OF CAINTA

    002 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. 1011 May 13, 1903 - JOSE MACHUCA v. CHUIDIAN

    002 Phil 210

  • G.R. No. 1055 May 13, 1903 - JOSE ACUÑA v. MUN. OF THE CITY OF ILOILO

    002 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 1227 May 13, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. HOWARD D. TERRELL

    002 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 1015 May 14, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. CANDIDO REPOLLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 1189 May 14, 1903 - ALEJANDRO BAUTISTA v. HON. ELIAS F. JOHNSON

    002 Phil 230

  • G.R. No. 1336 May 14, 1903 - GABRIELA ALIÑO, ET AL. v. IGNACIO VILLAMOR

    002 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. 38 May 15, 1903 - PASTELLS & REGORDOSA v. HOLLMAN & CO.

    002 Phil 235

  • G.R. No. 1043 May 15, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JULIAN ATIENZA

    002 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 1044 May 15, 1903 - PEDRO JULIA v. VICENTE SOTTO

    002 Phil 247

  • G.R. No. 1109 May 15, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE M. LERMA

    002 Phil 254

  • G.R. No. 1203 May 15, 1903 - IN RE: HOWARD D. TERRELL

    002 Phil 266

  • G.R. No. 1007 May 16, 1903 - PAULINO REYES v. HON. FELIX M. ROXAS

    002 Phil 268

  • G.R. No. 1049 May 16, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FRED L. DORR, ET AL.

    002 Phil 269

  • G.R. No. 1056 May 16, 1903 - AGUEDA BENEDICTO v. ESTEBAN LA RAMA

    002 Phil 293

  • G.R. No. 1111 May 16, 1903 - FELICIDAD GARCIA DE LARA v. JOSE GONZALEZ DE LARA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 294

  • G.R. No 1085 May 16, 1903 - RUDOLPH WAHL, ET AL. v. DONALDSON, SIMS & CO.

    002 Phil 301

  • G.R. No. 39 May 19, 1903 - TUASON & SAN PEDRO v. GAVINA ZAMORA & SONS

    002 Phil 305

  • G.R. No. 967 May 19, 1903 - DARIO AND GAUDENCIO ELEIZEGUI v. MANILA LAWN TENNIS CLUB

    002 Phil 309

  • G.R. No. 997 May 19, 1903 - MARIA UBALDO v. LAO-JIANQUIAO

    002 Phil 319

  • G.R. No. 1027 May 19, 1903 - RAMON DEL ROSARIO v. CLEMENTE DEL ROSARIO

    002 Phil 321

  • G.R. No. 1051 May 19, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FRED L. DORR, ET AL.

    002 Phil 332