Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1922 > March 1922 Decisions > G.R. No. L-17775 March 1, 1922 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VEGA ET AL.

043 Phil 41:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-17775. March 1, 1922. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PEDRO VEGA ET AL., Defendants. SILVESTRE REFRESCA and FERMIN VILLANUEVA, Appellants.

Primitivo L. Gonzalez for appellant Refresca.

Jose Syyap for appellant Villanueva.

Acting Attorney-General Tuason for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; EVIDENCE; CONFESSIONS. — Five men were accused of robbery in armed band; three of them acquitted. The remaining two, the appellants, were convicted. Upon the question of the existence of an armed band the only evidence was the extrajudicial confessions of the two appellants to the effect that the three defendants who were acquitted were the other members of the band and that all of the members were armed. Held: That though the confessions were inadmissible in evidence against the other defendants, who therefore were acquitted, such confessions, nevertheless, constituted sufficient proof, as against the persons who made them, of the existence of an armed band of more than three men.


D E C I S I O N


OSTRAND, J. :


Silvestre Refresca, Fermin Villanueva, Pedro Vega, Jose Villanueva, and Antonio de la Cruz were tried before the Court of First Instance of Batangas for the crime of robo en cuadrilla, the information alleging:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"That the above named accused, Pedro Vega, Silvestre Refresca, Fermin Villanueva, and Antonio de la Cruz, together with Pedro alias Tabong and one named Igme alias Sario who have not yet been found, conspiring together and confederating themselves, on or about the night of the 7th of November, 1919, in the municipality of Tanauan, Province of Batangas, Philippine Islands, being all armed with a revolver and other weapons, with intent of gain, en cuadrilla and by use of force, violence and intimidation, did voluntarily, illegally and criminally, assault the house of Raymundo Marudo, from which they stole and carried away the amount of P20 in paper money, a pair of pearl earrings valued at P2.50 and two khaki pantaloons worth P5, all to the value of P47.50, equivalent to 237 1/2 pesetas. The accused Silvestre Refresca has been already convicted of theft of large cattle in case No. 1790 of the docket of the Court of First Instance of Laguna, and is, therefore, a recidivist."cralaw virtua1aw library

Shortly after their arrest Silvestre Refresca and Fermin Villanueva made confessions in which they implicated the defendants Pedro Vega, Jose Villanueva, and Antonio de la Cruz. On the strength of the confessions the last named defendants were arrested and included in the information, but as at the trial of the case Silvestre Refresca and Fermin Villanueva retracted their confessions, and as there was no other evidence against the other defendants, the latter were acquitted. The court found the defendants Refresca and Fermin Villanueva guilty as charged and sentenced them, respectively, to ten years and seven years, ten months and twenty-one days of presidio mayor, with the accessory penalties prescribed by law, to indemnify jointly and severally Raymundo Marudo in the sum of P52.50, and each to pay one-fifth of the costs. The case is now before this court upon appeal from that sentence.

The evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants are guilty of robo but some doubt has been expressed as to the sufficiency of the proof of the existence of an armed band. Upon this point the only evidence is the confessions of the appellants at the time of their arrest and it is argued that as these confessions were insufficient to convict the other defendants, they must also be regarded as insufficient proof of there being a band of more than three armed persons. In answer to this we may say that as there, aside from the extrajudicial confessions of the accused Silvestre Refresca and Fermin Villanueva, was no proof of conspiracy or combination involving the other the other accused, such confessions were inadmissible in evidence against the latter and could not, of course, be utilized to established their guilt. (Bishop’s New Criminal Procedure, 2d ed., vol. 2, sec. 1248; Greenleaf on Evidence, 16th ed., vol. 1, sec 233.) It was therefore not so much a question of the sufficiency of the evidence as of its admissibility.

But there is no reason whatever why the confessions should not be used against the persons who made them. The defendants Silvestre Refresca and Fermin Villanueva having confessed that there were more than three persons in the band which committed the robbery and that all of them were armed and their respective confessions being competent evidence against each of these defendants, the court may take the confession into consideration and if satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt from such confessions that the robbery was committed by four or more armed men, may so find, irrespective of the fact that the other members of the band have not been brought to justice or have not been convicted. We are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the robbery in the present case was committed by an armed band.

The sentence of the lower court being in accordance with the law and the merits, the same is hereby affirmed with one-half of the costs in this instance against each of the appellants. So ordered.

Araullo, C.J., Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Avancena, Villamor, Johns, and Romualdez, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





March-1922 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-17226 March 1, 1922 - L. S. MOON & CO. v. Honorable FRANCIS BURTON HARRISON

    043 Phil 27

  • G.R. No. L-17775 March 1, 1922 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VEGA ET AL.

    043 Phil 41

  • G.R. No. L-18081 March 3, 1922 - IN RE: OF MORA ADONG v. CHEONG SENG GEE

    043 Phil 43

  • G.R. No. L-17493 March 4, 1922 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIO PERFECTO, ET AL.

    043 Phil 58

  • G.R. No. L-17748 March 4, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. GRACIANO L. CABRERA ET AL.

    043 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. L-17855 March 4, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. GRACIANO L. CABRERA ET AL.

    043 Phil 82

  • G.R. No. L-17283 March 7, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. SIXTO HERNANDEZ

    043 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. 17729 March 7, 1922 - L. P. FIEGE, ET AL. v. SMITH

    043 Phil 113

  • G.R. No. L-17584 March 8, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. GREGORIO SANTIAGO

    043 Phil 120

  • G.R. No. L-17603 March 8, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. ROSALIO PANALIGAN, ET AL.

    043 Phil 131

  • G.R. No. L-18699 March 8, 1922 - TAN CHICO v. Honorable PEDRO CONCEPCION

    043 Phil 141

  • G.R. No. L-15950 March 9, 1922 - CARLOS PALANCA v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS ET AL.

    043 Phil 149

  • G.R. No. L-16492 March 9, 1922 - E. MACIAS & Co. v. Warner

    043 Phil 155

  • G.R. No. L-16878 March 9, 1922 - SERAPIO BANAAD v. ALEJANDRA CASTANEDA

    043 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. L-17436 March 9, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. SERGIO MANZANILLA ET AL.

    043 Phil 167

  • G.R. No. L-18432 March 9, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. ISLANDS v. NICOLAS ENCARNACION

    043 Phil 172

  • G.R. No. 18600 March 9, 1922 - B.E. JOHANNES v. Honorable GEORGE R. HARVEY

    043 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. 16570 March 9, 1922 - SMITH, BELL & CO., LTD. v. VICENTE SOTELO MATTI

    044 Phil 874

  • G.R. No. 16869 March 13, 1922 - HEIRS OF ANTONIO ENRIQUEZ, ET AL. v. FRANCISCO ENRIQUEZ, ET AL.

    044 Phil 885

  • G.R. No. L-17633 March 14, 1922 - CLARA W. GILMER v. L. HILLIARD

    043 Phil 180

  • G.R. No. L-17865 March 15, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. CIPRIANA BUCSIT, ET AL.

    043 Phil 184

  • G.R. No. L-18056 March 16, 1922 - UNITED STATES v. ANGEL R SEVILLA

    043 Phil 186

  • IN RE Attorney EUSEBIO TIONKO : March 17, 1922 - 043 Phil 191

  • G.R. No. L-17230 March 17, 1922 - JOSE VELASCO v. TAN LIUAN & CO.

    043 Phil 195

  • G.R. No. L-18054 March 18, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. ARSENIO SUNGA Y REYES (alias) ARSENIO LOPEZ

    043 Phil 205

  • G.R. No. 18240 March 18, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. ENGRACIA CAPACIA

    043 Phil 207

  • IN RE: ANTONIO HORRILLENO : March 20, 1922 - 043 Phil 212

  • G.R. No. L-17866 March 20, 1922 - ANDREE C. CHEREAU v. ASUNCION FUENTEBELLA ET AL.

    043 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. L-18402 March 22, 1922 - CALIXTO BERBARI v. Honorable Carlos A. Honorable CARLOS A. IMPERIAL

    043 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. L-16924 March 23, 1922 - UNITED STATES v. Gregorio Perfecto

    043 Phil 225

  • G.R. No. L-17933 March 23, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. ATANASIO NANQUIL

    043 Phil 232

  • G.R. No. 17024 March 24, 1922 - DOMINGO BEARNEZA v. BALBINO DEQUILLA

    043 Phil 237

  • G.R. No. L-18203 March 27, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. TELESFORO DORADO, ET AL.

    043 Phil 240

  • G.R. No. L-17925 March 28, 1922 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. EVARISTO ABAYA

    043 Phil 247

  • G.R. No. L-17254 March 29, 1922 - CRISPULO VILLARUEL v. TAN KING

    043 Phil 251

  • G.R. No. L-18740 March 29, 1922 - WALTER E. OLSEN & CO. v. VICENTE ALDANESE

    043 Phil 259

  • G.R. No. L-16530 March 31, 1922 - MAMERTO LAUDICO, ET AL. v. MANUEL ARIAS RODRIGUEZ ET AL.

    043 Phil 270

  • G.R. No. L-18624 March 31, 1922 - GREGORIO MARQUEZ, ET AL. v. The Honorable BARTOLOME REVILLA

    043 Phil 274

  • G.R. No. L-18664 March 31, 1922 - MARIA GONZALEZ v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    043 Phil 277