G.R. No. 1459. March 17, 1905

Please log in to request a case brief.

4 Phil. 291

[ G.R. No. 1459. March 17, 1905 ]




The motion for a rehearing in this case is based upon the ground
that the complaint filed against this defendant and his codefendants
charges that three Americans committed the crime of robbery, while four
Americans were actually convicted of the crime.

It is a fact that what is usually regarded as the “title part” or
“caption” of the complaint gives the names of four persons, but what is
regarded as the “charging part” of the complaint, or, in other words,
that part of the complaint which contains the description of the
offense, alleges that the offense was committed by but three Americans.

An examination of the record discloses that fact that four Americans
were arrested prior to the time of the filing of the complaint in said
cause. The name of each of the four was inserted in the “title part” or
“caption” of the complaint. The names of the four were, respectively,
Joseph Howard, Joe Williams, John Mack, and Charles Nailor. The record
discloses the fact also that Charles Nailor was arrested because the
officer who made the arrest found in his possession a revolver and a
quantity of money at the time of his arrest. Evidently Nailor was
arrested upon the belief that he had participated in the fruits of the

Before the commencement of the trial of the cause against the three
Americans, John Mack escaped from the custody of the officers and was
not again arrested until after the others, Joseph Howard, Joe Williams,
and Charles Nailor, were tried. At the conclusion of the trial of
Howard, Williams, and Nailor the court found that the evidence was not
sufficient to support the charges against Charles Nailor, and therefore
discharged him from the custody of the law. The court found that the
evidence was sufficient to show that Joseph Howard and Joe Williams
were guilty of the crime charged in the complaint, and sentenced each
to be imprisoned for the period of eight years and eleven months of presidio mayor,
with the accessories provided for in article 57 of the Penal Code, etc.
At a later date John Mack was rearrested and placed upon trial alone,
and was sentenced by the judge of the Court of First Instance of the
Province of Pampanga for a period of eight years and eleven months of presidio mayor.

While the four Americans named in the complaint were arrested, and
while the complaint charged that the crime was committed by three only,
the record in the two causes discloses the fact that but three were
convicted. An examination of the evidence in the two causes discloses
beyond doubt evidence sufficient to justify the sentence imposed upon
the three Americans by the Court of First Instance of the Province of
Pampanga. So far as the record discloses, no injustice has been done to
the three Americans who have actually been sentenced.

No objection was made in the Court of First Instance to the
sufficiency or insufficiency of the complaint. The motion for a new
trial here is based upon the fact that the complaint is insufficient.
We are of the opinion that the complaint was defective, but inasmuch as
no objection was made, before or during the trial in the lower court,
and inasmuch as the evidence shows that the three persons who were
convicted were clearly guilty of the crime charged, and inasmuch as no
injustice has been done in the premises, the motion for a rehearing is
denied. The defects in the complaint here complained of under the facts
in this case are not sufficient to justify a reopening of the case for
a new trial.

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

Date created: April 24, 2014


Leave a Reply

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

Apply Filters