Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1918 > January 1918 Decisions > G.R. No. L-12979 January 28, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. SITO BALMES

037 Phil 504:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-12979. January 28, 1918. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SITO BALMES, Defendant-Appellant.

Pablo Borbon for Appellant.

Acting Attorney-General Paredes for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; ASSAULT UPON PERSON IN AUTHORITY. — Under the facts as set forth in the opinion in this case, the force used by the convict in resisting the authorities was not such as in contemplated in subsections 1, 2, 3, and 4 of article 250 of the Penal Code.


D E C I S I O N


CARSON, J. :


The defendant and appellant was convicted in the court below of atentado, and sentenced to two years, four months, and one day of prison correccional and to pay a fine of 625 pesetas, under the provisions of the first paragraph of article 250 of the Penal Code. The penalty was placed under this paragraph upon a finding that the accused assaulted a policeman with an oar. It appears that the policeman who was endeavoring to arrest suspected violators of an ordinance relating to the municipal fisheries, stepped over into the boat of an uncle of the accused to count the fish in the button of the boat, and that the accused stepped into the boat at or about the same time, evidently with the intention of opposing the action of the policeman in coming on board his uncle’s boat. Words passed between them, and in the darkness and confusion of the moment the boat was upset, and both parties were compelled to struggle ashore as best they could. Some of the witnesses for the prosecution insist that the accused tried to strike the policeman with his oar, and that the boat was upset in the struggle for possession of the oar. The incident occurred at night, the evidence as to exactly what did occur is conflicting and unsatisfactory. We do not think the evidence supports a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused made any attempt to use the oar as a weapon of defense, though it well maybe that in trying to balance themselves in the small boat, both parties tried to get hold of it. We are satisfied, however, that the accused resisted the policeman in the performance of his duty. We think that the offense proved to have been committed is that penalized in the last paragraph of article 250 of the Penal Code.

We do not find that the force used against the policeman was such as is contemplated in subsections 1, 2, 3, or 4 of article 250, under the rule announced in the case of U.S. v. Tabiana and Canillas (p. 515, post) recently decided.

We conclude, therefore, that the penalty imposed by the trial judge should be modified by substituting one year, eight months, and twenty-one days of prison correctional and a fine of 375 pesetas, with subsidiary imprisonment as prescribed by law, for so much thereof as imposes two years, four months, and one day of prison correctional and to pay a fine of 625 pesetas, and that thus modified, the judgment should be affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the appellant. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Johnson, Araullo, Street, and Malcolm, 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






January-1918 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-11109 January 7, 1918 - AMADEO MATUTE v. CHEONG BOO

    037 Phil 372

  • G.R. No. 12936 January 10, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO BATUNGBACAL

    037 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. L-11732 January 12, 1918 - FLORENCIO GONZALEZ DIEZ v. VICENTE DELGADO, ET AL.

    037 Phil 389

  • G.R. No. 13398 January 14, 1918 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. LEOCADIA MAURERA

    037 Phil 410

  • G.R. No. L-11328 January 15, 1918 - RUFINA CAUSING v. ALFONSO BENCER

    037 Phil 417

  • G.R. No. L-11519 January 17, 1918 - CITY OF MANILA v. J.C. RUYMANN

    037 Phil 421

  • G.R. No. L-11354 January 19, 1918 - BEHN v. IRA L. DAVIS, ET AL.

    037 Phil 431

  • G.R. No. L-12151 January 19, 1918 - ADRIANO BUENAVENTURA Y DEZOLLIER v. ANTONIO DAVID y ABELIDO

    037 Phil 435

  • G.R. No. L-11624 January 21, 1918 - E. M. BACHRACH v. "LA PROTECTORA" ET AL.

    037 Phil 441

  • G.R. No. L-12926 January 21, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. TOMAS DOMINGO 1st ET AL.

    037 Phil 446

  • G.R. No. L-12990 January 21, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. LAZARO JAVIER ET AL.

    037 Phil 449

  • G.R. No. 13217 January 21, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. TIMOTEO SANTOS

    037 Phil 453

  • G.R. No. L-12858 January 22, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO PINEDA

    037 Phil 456

  • G.R. No. L-13082 January 22, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. WENCESLAO DUMAUA ET AL.

    037 Phil 466

  • G.R. No. L-13283 January 23, 1918 - CASIMIRO BAYANI v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    037 Phil 468

  • G.R. No. L-11362 January 24, 1918 - H.L. KRIEDT v. E.C. McCULLOUGH & CO.

    037 Phil 474

  • G.R. No. L-12988 January 24, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. SARIKALA

    037 Phil 486

  • G.R. No. L-11102 January 28, 1918 - H. C. BEST v. LIZARRAGA HERMANOS

    037 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-11887 January 28, 1918 - CEFERINO ESTIVA Y ANISTA v. MARTIN ALVERO

    037 Phil 497

  • G.R. No. L-12979 January 28, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. SITO BALMES

    037 Phil 504

  • G.R. No. L-11310 January 31, 1918 - CARLOS PALANCA v. FRED WILSON & CO.

    037 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. L-12954 January 31, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. CHU LOY, ET AL.

    037 Phil 510

  • G.R. No. 12252 January 8, 1918 - SEGUNDA DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL. v. FERNANDO SANTA TERESA

    044 Phil 811

  • G.R. No. 11889 January 10, 1918 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. CARMEN MARTINEZ,ET AL.

    044 Phil 817