G.R. No. 1686. February 13, 1905

Please log in to request a case brief.

4 Phil. 207

[ G.R. No. 1686. February 13, 1905 ]




The defendants here were charged with the crime of robbery. The
complaint alleged that the said defendants did on the 23d day of
September, 1903, in a barrio of the pueblo of San Carlos,. Province of
Pangasinan, enter the house of one Regino Maminta, all being armed with
and then and there, by force and violence and with intent to deprive
the owner of the property therein, took and carried away the sum of 20
pesos, Mexican, and various pieces of jewelry, all of the value of 120
pesos, Mexican.

The said defendants were tried by the Court of First Instance of the
Province of Pangasinan on the 7th day of November, 1903, and each of
the defendants, Paulino Palisoc, Fabiano Diadib, Inocencio Valerio, and
Domingo Torres, was sentenced to be imprisoned for the period of five
years of presidio correccional; and Rufino Lavarias, because
the court found that he was the leader of the said band of robbers, was
sentenced to a period of six years of presidio correcciona;
the court also ordered the indemnification to the offended parties in
the sum of 120 pesos, Mexican, or the return of the property stolen,
and each of the said defendants to pay one-flfth part of the costs.
From this sentence Fabiano Diadib, Inocencio Valerio, and Rufino
Lavarias appealed to this court.

The record shows that at the beginning of the trial Rufino Lavarias
was not present and did not appear in court until after the fiscal had
presented all of the witnesses for the prosecution; all of the other
defendants were present, were duly arraigned, pleaded not guilty, and
were represented by a lawyer; that after the prosecution had closed its
case against all of the said defendants except Rufino Lavarias, the
court discovered that Rufino Lavarias was outside the court room. Upon
discovering this fact the court ordered the said defendant Rufino
Lavarias to appear in the court room, and then and there recalled one
of the witnesses for the prosecution, Regino Maminta, and proceeded to
examine Kim with reference to the part Rufino Lavarias took in the said
robbery charged in the complaint, without arraigning the said Rufino
Lavarias, reading to him the complaint, or informing him that he had
the right to be represented by an attorney during the trial, in
accordance with the provisions of sections 16, 17, and 18 of General
Orders, No. 58.

The provisions of sections 16, 17, and 18 of General Orders, No. 58,
are mandatory in their terms, and for the reason that the court did not
comply with the provisions of these sections, the judgment of the court
with reference to Rufino Lavarias is hereby reversed, and the cause is
remanded to the Court of First Instance of the Province of Pangasinan
for the purpose of a new trial.

Upon a consideration of the evidence adduced during the trial of
said cause, we are of the opinion that it was sufficient to support the
complaint filed in said cause; that the sentence of the court conformed
with the provisions of the Penal Code with reference to the crime
described in said complaint, and therefore the judgment of the court is
affirmed as to the sentence of Fabiano Diadib and Inocencio Valerio. So

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

Date created: April 23, 2014


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Apply Filters