People of the Philippines v. Enrico S. Esturis, et al.
Supreme Court
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. 45406 March 11, 1937
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
ENRICO ESTURIS Y SALVADOR, BONIFACIO TARZON Y MAQUINTO (alias BONIFACIO TUAZON), and PEDRO NOLASCO Y RUBIO,defendants.
PEDRO NOLASCO Y RUBIO,appellant.
Jose Teodoro for appellant.
Office of the Solicitor-General Tuason for appellee.
DIAZ,J.:
Posecuted for attempted trespass to dwelling and convicted thereof upon his voluntary confession of guilt made before the evidence was presented by the prosecution, Pedro Nolasco y Rubio was sentenced by the Court of First Instance of Manila to one month ofarresto menorand to pay fine of P200. Not agreeing to the judgment, said accused appealed therefrom; but the attorney appointed to defend himde oficio, believing that there is no possible defense for him and that, furthermore, the penalty imposed upon him is mild, make no recommendation, thereby making it understood that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.
The Solicitor-General recommends that the aforesaid judgment be modified in the sense of imposing upon the appellant from one to the ten days ofarresto menorand a fine not exceeding P500.
The penalty prescribed for the crime committed by the appellant, asking into consideration the mitigating circumstances of voluntary confession of guilt present therein, without any aggravating circumstances to offset it, isarresto menorin its minimum period and a fine of less than P200 (article 280; 51; 64, rule 2; and 71 of the Revised Penal Code, the latter as amended by section 3 of Commonwealth Act No. 217). In other words, the penalty which should be imposed upon the appellant is ten days ofarresto menorshould be imposed upon appellant is ten days ofarresto menorand a fine of P150 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
Modified as above-stated the appealed judgment is affirmed in all other respect, with costs to the appellant. So ordered.
Avanceña, C.J., Villa-Real, Abad Santos, Imperial, Laurel and Concepcion, JJ., concur.
Related decisions
Decisions on similar questions that neither cites the other: they rely on the same precedents, are cited together, or apply the same law.
- L-9064-67 April 30 v. Alcaraz1958both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-48895 September 4 v. Conwi1985both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-4838 March 28 v. Dacanay1953both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-1895 October 2 v. Koh1948both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-1625 and L-1626 August 30 v. Lorenzo Pineda Union C. Kayanan for…1949both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-12629 December 9 v. Torres1959both apply Act 217, CA 217
- L-10015 December 18 v. Marita Ocampo y Pure Office of the…1956both apply Act 217, CA 217
- People v. Fidel Fortuno Segundo Martinez for…1942both apply Act 217, CA 217
Laws it applies
Links and connections are read from the text by pattern matching, not checked by a person. A guide, not a finding.