Professional Documents
Culture Documents
RECENT DECISIONS
of the Philippine Supreme Court
th I talumn is presented a dig-cst of current
These decisions have not yet been published
pecinlly those rendered in. division, will not
I'Ort.l
I AL
LAW-Ho:\lICIDE-SEC-
HOT SUFFICIENT
TO CONSTITUTE
IOUS INTENT.-P.
P. I. v. Ang
, alia. Yusay and Co Sang alias
KI. G. R. No. 37007, June 21,
Margarito Ocat went out to
D his boat to catch fish. About
ur later Ocat received a shot in
right forearm.
He shouted
., did you shoot me", and comrowing toward the shore.
D the boat was close to the shore
r hot was fired which hit
n the left side of the abdoThere being no proof of mond treachery, the question
to one of whether or not
u ed is to be convicted of
homicide or of homicide
h reckless imprudence. R eld:
n conceive of one recklessly
ng in such a manner as to
d another, but the principles
govern reckless imprudence
then apply when the person
d gives evidence of his prebut nevertheless another shot
with fatal result. Malicious
ay have been lacking in the
n lance, but cannot be preto have been lacking in the
instance.
(In division of
Malcolm, J.; Concurring
Santos, Vickers, Imperial,
S 'eled by SANTIAGO C. GRE-
G~EFf'ECT
OF
WR:>NG
PosRoberto
Dimalanta
vs.
ap, Flol'encia Galang ami
o SlIll'lIdor, defendants;
l' doro ,t:CrcadIJ, intervenor
I e, G. R . .vo.. '36876, March
PI' ON 0.'
TilE
RIGHT
OF
24, 1933.-The
spouses Sixto Lacap
and Florencia
Galang
mortgaged
their house on October 12, 1929' to
the plaintiff, Roberto Dimalanta, to.
secure the repayment
of a loan of
P1,600.00 within one year without
interest.
The house in question was
built on the registered land of Leonardo
Guison
Pablo.
Plaintiff's
mortgage was recorded in the book
of records of chattel mortgages for
the city of Manila.
On January 14,
1930, said spouses sold the house in
question to Victoriano Salvador un. del' pacto de retro for a period of
one year without m.entioning
the'
first mortgage.
Again,' on November 3, 1930, said spouses sold the
same house to Eliodoro Mercado under pacto de retro within six months
without mentioning
that the house
had been previously
mortgaged
to
plaintiff
and sold under pacto de
retro to Victorino Salvador.
Said
spouses
abandoned
the house on
November 1930, and Eliodoro Mercado took possession of it. Plaintiff
contended that the trial court erred
in ruling that his inscription
and
registry in the book of chattel mortgages
was
without
legal
value.
Reid.
Appellant's
contention
is
clearly without merit.
Appellant's
mortgage was not registered
or recorded in accordance with the law,
and is, therefore,
ineffective
as to
third persons.
There be.ingno valid
mortgage
on the house, Eliodoro
Mercado being the first one to take
possession in good faith is entitled
to the same.
(Division of Three,
per Vickers, J.; concurring Villamor,
Ostrand, JJ.) Briefed
by SANTIAGO
C.
GREGORIO.
nt appealed. Held:
Under
graph 3, Article 210 of the RePenal Code, the offender shall
r the penalties of An'esto Main its minimum and maximum
s and a fine of not less than
value of the gift and not more
D three times such value.
The
ty applicable to the accused
ty of attempted bribery is two
less than tha t prescrib~d
n ummated offenses. Accordto Article 9 of the Revised Penal
Ie s grave felonies are those
ell the law punishes with penalhich in their maximum period
rrectional in accordance with
Ie 25 of the Revised Penal
and in the scale of penalties
ing to Article 25 the followare correctional penalties:
PriC rrectionat, Arresto Mayor,
i nand Distierro. But Ar26 provides that a fine, if it
not exceed P6000 but is not
han P200 is a correctional peTherefore, the penalty apble to an offender guilty of an
pted bribery is a fine of not
than P200 nor more than 1'600
a further fine based on the
of the gift. Accused sentenced
y a fine of P203 with subsidiary
nmcnt in case of insolvency.
Di i ion, Per Vickers, J.; Street
antos, JJ.;
concurring.)
f d by J1IEROTEO R. VILLAROSA.
U NY-WHAT
PRIVILEGED
CHARGES
IN
ARE
POLITICAL
PROCEDURE--SUSPEN-
OF SENTENCE
OF MINOR
DELIN-
of the PhiliptJine
Islands, Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs. Santos et al., Defendant-A1Jpellant,
G.
R. No. 37391,., A1Jril 17, 1933.-It
appeared
that the defendant
was
less than 18 years of age on the
date when he inflicted the. injuries
charged against him.
A sentence
was passed convicting him of serious physical injuries and ordering
for the suspension of the sentence
and that the appellant be confinEd
in an institution
to be designated
by the Commissioner of the Public
Welfare until he reaches the age of
majority.
The defendant appealed.
Held:
It is error for the lower
court to pronounce sentence, before
suspendng the proceedings and committing the appellant to the custody
of a proper institution or person designated for the custody of minors.
It is furthel' necessary for the trial
court to designate a particular
person or institution to w,hom the custcdy of the appellant should be committed aftel' hearing the public welQUENTs.-People
fire commISSIOner and the appelnt himself or person representinghrn. (In Division, Per Street, d.;
ntos and VIckers JJ., concurring.)
Briefed by HIEROTEOR. VILLAROSA.
o.
LAW-MERCHA'I'T
JUDICIAL
PERSONALITY
DEOF
\ T l.E PAR'fNERSHIP-Es'l\'p
PosalIIaTch 31,
. Emilio Boada, Pedro Boada,
Jo e Boada, were partners of
('alalanes de Pedro BOlida",
nregistered me1'cantile partnerdoing business in the PhilipI lands for fifteen years -and as
h paid the Internal Reven"Je
but Emilio Boadn has not
I ny tax. The partnership wa~
I d :mu merged into the corlion known as "Boada, Castro
r I~af:cl"to which Emilio sold
in 'rest. The issue is:
Was
"liD Boada a merchant and thereubjected to pay the merchant
,f I',? Held: "A single ad does
n titute a merchant.
In conI tion of the Code of Como 'J a merchant is one who
s various acts
of como 0 *. It will be seen that a
f:milio
G. R. No. 36994,
'mercbant'
in order to be sUbjected
to tbe necess"ity of paying the tax,
nlUst be "'engaged' in tbe "sale, barter, or excbange of personal property" *.* *. To be 'engliged' as the
word is used here, a person must
be occupied "Cir emplayed In tbe sale,
barter,
etc. of personal property."
Whitaker
vs. Rafferty
(38 Phil.
5U8). The 'Eure"au of Internal
Revenue, haVing considered 'Los Catalanes de Pedro 'Eoada' as t~glstered
pal'tnersnip
for purposes of taxation Is now esto'pped from alleging
th1it S'ald partnersb1'P bas no jurIdical personality because It bas not
been registered.
Affirll1'ed.(In
Di
~"'isjun, Pel' Ostrand,
J:; Villamor,
"Villareal, Vickers, ImperIal, JJ., con
'cu1'1"ing). Br"iefed hyP. C. bINo.
'THEPl'-CON'f'ESSIONsREPUlnA"'rEO
P. 1.
AT'I'HETRIAL-P.
Nicomedes
Fmgata,
1)S.
Agmttfa,
Pedro
n:nd
FORCIllLE
FAILURE
W:rrH
TO
THE
ENTRY
AND
INCORPORATE
REtORD
OF
D:';'I't\INER/.!;VIUbSC1;
'fIlE
CAS}")
AppE. ..'L.-Ciriaco
Lapuz
us.
Paulino
Candelaria,
R.
G. No.
36359 Jla1'ch 21, 1933.-An
action of
forcible entry and detainer.
DisUPON
No. 496
MAKE
AS
38
OF A
AMENDED-FAILURE'
ASSIGNMENT
OF
ERROR-~
AL LAW-ABATEME:'IT
OF
no witness to present.
Per Avanceiia, J.; Vickers and Imperial, J J.,
concur.
BTiefed by A. ARANA.s.
CRIMINAL
C&-4UDICIAL
DISCRETION
OF
AGGRAVATE\':;
TREACHERY
AND
I. VS. Castor
Cinco and COTnelio Me11diola, G. R.
No. 87504, J1l11e 28, 1983.-Castor
Cinco shot Rosalia
Atienza
one
night, causing
the latter's
death.
The trial judge found the qualifying circumstance
of treachery
and
the further
aggravating
circumstance of nocturnity.
Held:
The
crime committed
is murder,
the
homicide having been qualified by
treachery.
The circumstance of nocturnity cannot however betaken as
a further aggravating
circumstance
inasmuch as that is already included
in the circumstance
of treachery.
Per Malcolm, J.; Street, Abad Santos, Hull, and Imperial, JJ., concur.
Bj'iefed by A. ARANAS.
N<JCTURNITY-P.
CRIMINAL
P.
LAW-Ar'ULTERY-AG-
GRAVATING CmCUMSTANCE
OF DWEL-
Pacita Val71wria
and Rustico
Turnanda,
G. R. No.
37008, April, 1988.-Rustico
Tumanda, entered the bedroom of Pac ita
Valmoria and her husband, who was
away.
Tumanda and Valmoria cohabited
carnally
and in this act
were surprised by the offended party, the husband of Pacita Valmoria.
Held:
The aggravating
circumstance
of dwelling
must
be
taken into consideration in imposing
the penalty in this prosecution for
adultery against Rustico Tumanda.
Per Imperial, J.; Street and Abad
Santos, JJ:, concur.
BTiefed by A.
LING--P.
1. VS .lICl/(ricio Reyes, G. R.
5, April 6, 1933.-Defendhi criminal case was infore trial that he could ask
lory process to summon
he might want to presmanifested that he had
. After the evidence of
ution was terminated, the
moved fo..suspension of the
n order that he could have
present a witness.
The
nied this motion.
Held:
r of the court denying the
. n oC the trial as asked by
lIant ill order to present his
I not erroneous, taking
into
that when appellant was
d that he could ask for comploce s against his with manifested that he had
LAW
CIRCUMSTANCES
P.
T.
VS.
ARANAS.
CRnlINAL
LAW-ARsON-WHEN
P. T. VS. Gregorio
Naiiaidego,
G. R. No. 27887, May
.9, 1988.-Facts:
The defendant in
this case set fire to the house of
CONSUl\UIATED-P.
C.
l\!ASAQUEL.
CERTIORARI:
VIOLATIO:-I
OF
DELI. 'QUE:-ICY IN
ELECTION
THE
CEDULA TAX-EFFECT
PAYMENT
OF
CATlON-
LAWOF
PRESCRIP-
WHEN
SUMMONS
By
PUBl
NECESSARY-Pet
OF
SUBSEQUENT
AC&IF.F.l,IESTOF REI:IIBURSEMENT
, II '.\1, LIAIlIUTY.-The
TO
Asusos
TY
OF
DESHONESTOS-PROBABILI-
TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE-P.
P. I .. Pla:nliff
and Appellee vs. Paulino Lozadct, Defendant
and Appellant. G. R. No. 37764, April 12, 193.'1.
-The
offended
party,
a girl of
fifteen, and the accused, a boy of
fo:'rleen,
were pupils of the same
school. There is a sharp conflict in
the testimony of the witnesses as to
what occurred on the afternoon
of
December 9, 1931. According to the
o:::fer.ded party
and her servant,
the accused without warning
grabbed the offended
party and kissed
her a!1d fondled her breasts.
On
the other hand, the accused and his
\\'itnesses maintained
that when the
accused met the offended
girl, he
greeted her by saying, "Good after1100n, Miss Cortes"; that the offended party apparently
angered by the
salutation,
called the accused "negro", "chongo", and "mono", and begun to beat him with her parasol;
that
the accused pushed
the offended girl to free himself from the
barbed wire fence behind him. Held:
It was error for the trial judge to
consider as improbable
that the offended girl should have called the
accused "negro", "chongo", "mono".
That under the circumstances
of the
case, the story of the defence
is
more probable than that of the prosecution for if the offended
party
was a proud girl and regarded
herself as superiol' to the accused, who
",as dark and homely and poor, it
is not difficult to believe that the
offended party regarded the accused
as presumptuous
and resented
his
of addrEssing her.
(Division
r e, Per Vickers, J., Santos, and
rial, JJ., concurring.)
Briefed
Eo J. A.
LAw-People
of the
pine Islcl7lds, Plaintiff and Ap, 118. Ricardo de los Santos,
ant and A]Jpel/ant, G. R. No.
, Jllne 7, 1.?33.-The inform acharges marcious damage to
ty but the trial court found
app llant guilty under sec. 45
the Irrigation Law.
The dent dh'erted the water from an
fon dike belonging to the
mment.
The defence is that
perforation was not malicious
was made only fOl"the pUl"pose
relieving the overflow over the
dant's palay. Held:
The deant is guilty of misdemeanor
eel in section 45 in relation to
n 47 of Act No. 2152. Section
not require that the internee with the dike should be ma '0 exception can be taken
e fact that the conviction was
r a different provision from
t more particularly contemplatIn the statute concerning malidamage to property, for the
ation charges all the elements
tRined in the misdemeanor defined
tion 45 of Act. No. 2152."
. ion of three, per Street, J.,
to and Imperial, JJ., concu1'.) Briefeel by E. J. A.
IGATION
10 ES
GRAVES--SUFFICIENCY
and
II e vs. Ci"ilICO Ramos, Defe'lldd .4ppcllant, G. R. :Vo. 37750,
10, 19J.l.-The
accused was
i d of Jc,:;iones graves in the
court. The evidence fully S11Sthe findings that the accused
ted the injuries complained of.
er, as to the duration of the
I treatment or of the pel"iod
pacity, the only evidence
d is the m(:di~al certificate
A GoOD DEFENCE
IN THE
TION IS VALID
FIRST
IN THE
PROSECU-
SECOND PRO-
se;cuTf()N-People
of the Philippine
Islands, Plaintiff
and Appellee
vs.
!1'ineo San Jose, Defendant
and Appellant. G. R. No. 37229, June 10,
1933.-The
defendant lawfully contracted his first marriage on December 6, 1903. As absolute decl;ee of
divorce was granted on September
16, 1908 although at that time the
law did not authorize the granting
of divorce a vinculis.
Appellant then
married for the second time, and on
January
10( 1910, he was convicted
of bigamy.
Having served his sentence, he contracted
a third marriage 011July 5, 1925 when his first
wife was stilI living.
Held:
"The
1:e1'm of the civil decree of divoJ"Ce
was absolute and under the conditions the appellant
perhaps had a
right to believe that his marriage
was lawful. It is true that the same
defence
existed
against
the first
prosecution but as that occurred on
the very heels of the divorce, the
defence was not raised, and the fact
that he bas served one sentence
already is something against the repetition of the penalty."
Defendant
acquitted.
(Division of three, per
Street, J., Santos and Imperial, JJ.,
concurring.)
Briefed by E. J. A.