SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

G.R. No. 1647  April 11, 1905

THE UNITED STATES,Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ADAUCTO OCAMPO,Defendant-Appellant.

Ledesma, Sumulong & Quintos for appellant.
Office of the Solicitor-General Araneta for appellee.

CARSON, J.:

Adaucto Ocampo, the appellant in this case, was sentenced by the trial court to six years' imprisonment for the crime of robbery.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The testimony connecting him with the crime of which he was convicted consisted of statements of three self-confessed accomplices. Counsel for the defense urged that this evidence was incompetent and should not have been taken into consideration by the trial court.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

While the evidence of accomplices or confederates is always subject to grave suspicion, "coming, as it does, from a polluted source," and should be received with great caution and closely and doubtingly examined, we are of the opinion, nevertheless, that it is admissible and competent, and may be taken into consideration under the provisions of section 55 of General Orders, No. 58, series of 1900.

The rule allowing the admission of accomplices or confederates in the crime to testify is supported by public policy and necessity, since it is scarcely possible to detect conspiracies and many worse offenses without the information of those who are implicated in the crime. (Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 397.)

The evidence adduced at the trial fully establishes the guilt of the accused, and there was no error prejudicial to the rights of the appellant and the sentence appealed from should be affirmed, with the costs in both instances against the appellant. So ordered.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa and Johnson, JJ., concur.