1905 / Apr

G.R. No. 1090 - APRIL 1905 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. No. 1090April 29, 1905 United States vs. Toribio Gonzalez G.R. No. 1633April 29, 1905 United States vs. Chinaman Co-Cuaco G.R. No. 1766April 29, 1905 United States vs. Juan Angel Michelena G.R. No. 1877April 29, 1905 United States vs. Ricardo Gutierrez G.R. No. 1934April 29, 1905 United States vs. Juan de Leon, et al. G.R. No. 1981April 29, 1905 United States vs. Anselmo Diris, et al. G.R. No. 1984April 29, 1905 United States vs. Gregorio Hernandez, et al. G.R. No. 1998April 29, 1905 United States vs. Anastacio Redion G.R. No. 2057April 29, 1905 United States vs. Adriano Concepcion G.R. No. 2158April 29, 1905 United States vs. Julian Budiao, et al. G.R. No. 1650April 28, 1905 United States vs. Lino Litonjua, et al. G.R. No. 1181April 27, 1905 United States vs. Engracio Villafuerte, et al. G.R. No. 1612April 27, 1905 United States vs. George Gray G.R. No. 1707April 27, 1905 United States vs. Juan Quilatan, et al. G.R. No. 1932April 27, 1905 United States vs. Mariano Panganiban, et al. G.R. No. 1910April 26, 1905 United States vs. Roman Gustilo G.R. No. 1930April 26, 1905 United States vs. Margarito Acabal, et al. G.R. No. 2118April 26, 1905 United States vs. Pablo Valdehueza G.R. No. 2231April 26, 1905 United States vs. Evaristo Paynaga G.R. No. 2374April 26, 1905 United States vs. John C. Sweeney G.R. No. 1881April 25, 1905 United States vs. Eusebio de la Serna, et al. G.R. No. 1925April 25, 1905 United States vs. Tomas Cañeta G.R. No. 2029April 25, 1905 United States vs. Chauncey McGovern G.R. No. 2032April 25, 1905 United States vs. Antonio Nubla G.R. No. 2052April 25, 1905 United States vs. Francisco Licas G.R. No. 2062April 25, 1905 United States vs. Agustina Barrera G.R. No. 2139April 25, 1905 United States vs. Enrico Ilao G.R. No. 2245April 25, 1905 United States vs. Francisco Javate G.R. No. 1800April 24, 1905 United States vs. Fermin Gregorio, et al. G.R. No. 1871April 24, 1905 United States vs. Florentino Rallos G.R. No. 1661April 19, 1905 United States vs. Feliciano Villarosa G.R. No. 1755April 19, 1905 United States vs. Santiago de la Cruz, et al. G.R. No. 1773April 19, 1905 United States vs. Hilario Santiago, et al. G.R. No. 2000April 19, 1905 United States vs. Vicente Lim Tico, et al. G.R. No. 2198April 19, 1905 United States vs. Silverio Nuñez, et al. G.R. No. 1486April 18, 1905 United States vs. Florencio Racines, et al. G.R. No. 1727April 18, 1905 United States vs. Julio de la Cruz, et al. G.R. No. 2170April 18, 1905 United States vs. Juan Caday, et al. G.R. No. 2176April 18, 1905 United States vs. Candido Fulgueras G.R. No. 1557April 17, 1905 United States vs. Amado Santos G.R. No. 1943April 17, 1905 United States vs. Benito Santa Ana G.R. No. 2134April 17, 1905 United States vs. Eusebio Cagayan, et al. G.R. No. 2092April 15, 1905 United States vs. Alejandro Gonzalez, et al. G.R. No. 2200April 15, 1905 United States vs. Pantaleon Cantil, et al. G.R. No. 1714April 14, 1905 United States vs. Esteban Logario, et al. G.R. No. 1899April 14, 1905 United States vs. Rufino Magsambol G.R. No. 1939April 13, 1905 United States vs. Guillermo Macalinao G.R. No. 1588April 12, 1905 United States vs. Antonio San Pedro G.R. No. 1647April 11, 1905 United States vs. Adaucto Ocampo G.R. No. 1897April 11, 1905 United States vs. Policarpo Aquino G.R. No. 1953April 11, 1905 United States vs. Paulino Fuentes, et al. G.R. No. 1504April 8, 1905 United States vs. Robert L. Highfill G.R. No. 1537April 8, 1905 United States vs. Geronimo Milla, et al. G.R. No. 1540April 8, 1905 United States vs. Victor Ramos, et al. G.R. No. 1862April 8, 1905 United States vs. Julian Dagalea G.R. No. 1487April 6, 1905 United States vs. Ismael Tan-Seco, et al. G.R. No. 1683April 5, 1905 United States vs. Antonio Vizquera, et al. G.R. No. 1530April 4, 1905 United States vs. Venancio Santos G.R. No. 1760April 3, 1905 United States vs. Irineo Bibal G.R. No. 1988April 3, 1905 United States vs. Marcelo Caparas, et al. G.R. No. 1375April 1, 1905 United States vs. Pacifico Gonzaga G.R. No. 1703April 1, 1905 United States vs. Eusebio Capaducia The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. United States vs. Toribio Gonzalez United States vs. Chinaman Co-Cuaco United States vs. Juan Angel Michelena United States vs. Ricardo Gutierrez United States vs. Juan de Leon, et al. United States vs. Anselmo Diris, et al. United States vs. Gregorio Hernandez, et al. United States vs. Anastacio Redion United States vs. Adriano Concepcion United States vs. Julian Budiao, et al. United States vs. Lino Litonjua, et al. United States vs. Engracio Villafuerte, et al. United States vs. George Gray United States vs. Juan Quilatan, et al. United States vs. Mariano Panganiban, et al. United States vs. Roman Gustilo United States vs. Margarito Acabal, et al. United States vs. Pablo Valdehueza United States vs. Evaristo Paynaga United States vs. John C. Sweeney United States vs. Eusebio de la Serna, et al. United States vs. Tomas Cañeta United States vs. Chauncey McGovern United States vs. Antonio Nubla United States vs. Francisco Licas United States vs. Agustina Barrera United States vs. Enrico Ilao United States vs. Francisco Javate United States vs. Fermin Gregorio, et al. United States vs. Florentino Rallos United States vs. Feliciano Villarosa United States vs. Santiago de la Cruz, et al. United States vs. Hilario Santiago, et al. United States vs. Vicente Lim Tico, et al. United States vs. Silverio Nuñez, et al. United States vs. Florencio Racines, et al. United States vs. Julio de la Cruz, et al. United States vs. Juan Caday, et al. United States vs. Candido Fulgueras United States vs. Amado Santos United States vs. Benito Santa Ana United States vs. Eusebio Cagayan, et al. United States vs. Alejandro Gonzalez, et al. United States vs. Pantaleon Cantil, et al. United States vs. Esteban Logario, et al. United States vs. Rufino Magsambol United States vs. Guillermo Macalinao United States vs. Antonio San Pedro United States vs. Adaucto Ocampo United States vs. Policarpo Aquino United States vs. Paulino Fuentes, et al. United States vs. Robert L. Highfill United States vs. Geronimo Milla, et al. United States vs. Victor Ramos, et al. United States vs. Julian Dagalea United States vs. Ismael Tan-Seco, et al. United States vs. Antonio Vizquera, et al. United States vs. Venancio Santos United States vs. Irineo Bibal United States vs. Marcelo Caparas, et al. United States vs. Pacifico Gonzaga United States vs. Eusebio Capaducia The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 1090 April 29, 1905

THE UNITED STATES,complainant-appellee,
vs.
TORIBIO GONZALEZ,defendant-appellant.

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

ARELLANO,C.J.:

The death of Pedro de Asis, which occurred at a time when he had left the house of the defendant, being sent by the latter to that in which the act occurred on the same day, facts perfectly proven, raises serious doubt in deciding the question at issue in the case, viz, whether it was the result of an illness from which the deceased suffered, which view is urged by the defense, or whether his death was caused by the beating and ill treatment which he received from the defendant, according to the charges presented by Deogracias Balitaan and urged afterwards by the prosecuting attorney.

These features do not exclude each other. They could have existed together. The beating and maltreatment might have fallen on a sick man — seriously ill, as stated by the defense — and have hastened the death which resulted.

Without offsetting the evidence for the prosecution, all of the defense was to sustain the fact of the existence of the acute illness, with the possible result of death occurring on the following day after its appearance, and this is not sufficient to set aside the consideration given the evidence by the judge in his judgment if no error or any departure from the facts established by the evidence is set up against same. The judge found the facts sufficiently proven beyond reasonable doubt to constitute the crime of homicide, and that the defendant is the principal in the commission of the same, so the judgment appealed form is correct.

The extenuating circumstance provided for in paragraph 3 of article 9 of the Penal Code has been well taken into consideration, but not so that provided for in paragraph 7, according to the doctrine established in the judgments of the criminal branch of the court of last resort in Spain dated March 5, 1878, and October 15, 1879, cited by the prosecution. However, the extenuating circumstance provided for in article 11 of the Penal Code should be taken into consideration and paragraph 5 of article 81 should be applied.

Therefore we affirm the judgment appealed from in all respects with the further penalty of indemnifying the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000, Philippine currency, and to pay the costs in this instance. So ordered.

Torres, Mapa, Johnson and Carson, JJ.,concur.