SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

G.R. No. 1173  August 27, 1903

THE UNITED STATES,Complainant-Appellee, vs. BONIFACIO FULGENCIO,Defendant-Appellant.

Joaquin Rodriguez Serra for appellant.
Solicitor-General Araneta for appellee.

WILLARD, J.:

Eulogio La Orinario and Gregorio Rivera both testified that the defendant, a Manila policeman, demanded of Eulogio 20 pesos. The testimony of these witnesses, as it appears in the record, is somewhat confused, but in view of the fact that the defendant presented no evidence, and that the statements of these two witnesses are therefore uncontradicted, we consider them sufficient to establish the fact of this demand.chanrobles virtual law library

Eulogio, telling the defendant and his companions that he would get the money, reported the matter to the authorities, and by them was furnished with two marked bills of 5 pesos each, which he in the afternoon of the same day gave to the defendant. The latter was arrested almost in the act, with the marked bills in his pocket.chanrobles virtual law library

Eulogio and his companions had overturned a barrel from a carreton and scattered its contents in the street. The defendant and his companions had, on this account, either arrested the witness or threatened to do so unless money was paid to them.chanrobles virtual law library

The offense falls within article 383 of the Penal Code.chanrobles virtual law library

The court below, without appreciating any aggravating circumstances, sentenced the defendant in the maximum degree. This was error. We fix the penalty at the maximum of the medium degree.chanrobles virtual law library

Before the trial commenced the case was dismissed as to the defendants Medina and Piñon. Why this was done does not appear. But, whatever the reason may have been, such dismissal can not be alleged by the defendant as a ground for acquitting him of an offense of which he has been proven guilty.chanrobles virtual law library

The judgment below is reversed, and the defendant sentenced to four months and twenty days of arresto mayor, and a fine of 30 pesos, with the costs of both instances against him.chanrobles virtual law library

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Mapa, and McDonough, JJ., concur.