C.A. No. L-562 - People vs. de Gorostiza

Around six o’clock in the afternoon of October twenty-one, nineteen hundred and forty-two, three policemen of the vice squad of the City of San Pablo—Quirico Azucena, Domingo Lacatan, and Teofilo Cruz—went to barrio Concepcion upon a tip that jueteng was to be played there.
Upon reaching near the precise place, the policemen formed a semicircle around a shed that had no walls.
The policemen saw persons going inside the shed one after another and handling Gregorio de Gorostiza’s small bundles of paper.
Arsenio Ticzon was the last to come.
The policemen watched the activity inside the shed where accused and other persons were gathered, and upon noticing that they were about to play jueteng, they raided the place.
The group of persons scampered away.
Gorostiza ran to an adjoining house after leaving on the table the bag Exhibit F.
Cruz picked up the bag and followed Gorostiza, who, when called upon to surrender, gave himself up.
As Ticzon attempted to run away, Azucena grabbed him.
Lacatan seized from Ticzon’s left hand two pieces of paper, Exhibits A-I and A-2.
Lacatan found on the ground four envelopes containing:

six rolled white paper marked Exhibit A; and
small bundles of paper contained in envelopes identified as Exhibits B, B-I, B-2, C, C-I, C-2, D, D-I, D-2, D-3, E, E-I, E-2, and E-3.

Gorostiza and Ticzon were taken to the police headquarters where Assistant Chief of Police Vicente Carikitan investigated them.

During the investigation, Cruz opened, in the presence of Gorostiza, the bag Exhibit F and took from it:

pieces of paper marked Exhibit F-I; and
envelopes marked Exhibits F-2 to F-9 containing white sheets of rolled pad paper; and
bills of different denominations amounting to P4.43 marked as Exhibit G.

The pieces of paper Exhibits A-I and A-2, found in Ticzon’s possession, and Exhibit F-I, found in the bag left by Gorostiza when he ran away, contained written jueteng numbers bet on and the amounts of bets in centavos.
Policemen Lacatan and Cruz testified that they had expert knowledge of the game of jueteng.
The defense did not attempt to contradict the testimony of Lacatan and Cruz as to the nature of the three exhibits.

Gorostiza admitted in Exhibit H, which was signed by him, the presence of one maong sack referring to bag Exhibit F, the cash P4.43, and “jueteng paraphernalias.”
Ticzon admitted in Exhibit I, which was signed by him, the presence of “jueteng paraphernalias” as evidence.
Gorostiza and Ticzon jointly admitted in Exhibit J that, when arrested, policemen Azucena, Lacatan, and Cruz found pieces of paper containing jueteng numbers, and that the accused were searching for jueteng collectors to make effective the bets made in the pieces of paper because of their strong hunch in favor of the numbers written in the papers, though they were unable to make the bets effective because of their arrest.
Exhibit J was worded in Tagalog and stated that on October twenty-one, nineteen hundred and forty-two, appellants were caught by policemen Azucena, Lacatan, and Cruz with pieces of paper with jueteng numbers; that they were looking for collectors (“cobrador”) to make effective the bets (“anuncio”); that they could not bet because policemen arrested them and brought them to their station; and that they signed on October twenty-five, nineteen hundred and forty-two, in the City of San Pablo.

The defense attempted to show that the two defendants did not participate in the afternoon and at the place in question in a game of jueteng either as collector or cashier.
Each accused offered explanations as to their respective presence at the place of their arrest.
Ticzon alleged that he signed Exhibit J because he was promised to be prosecuted only as a mere jueteng bettor.
Gorostiza attacked the admissibility of Exhibit J because the chief of police allegedly told him to sign it so that he would not be molested anymore, and he pointed out that neither the chief of police nor policemen Lacatan and Cruz, who were instrumental witnesses of Exhibit J, refuted the alleged promise or coercion.
The Court considered that when Exhibit J was signed on October twenty-five, nineteen hundred and forty-two, appellants were not under arrest because, based on their own testimony, they were allowed to go home after signing Exhibits H and I on October twenty-one, the date of their arrest.
The Court also found that Exhibit J was written in Tagalog, the language of the locality; Gorostiza read it before signing; and Ticzon’s claim of inability to read and write was belied by his signatures in Exhibits I and J, whose penmanship indicated familiarity with writing.
The Court concluded it was probable that the accused, losing all hopes of acquittal, offered to accept responsibility as mere jueteng bettors and were made to sign a statement of what they were willing to admit.

The lower court conducted an ample analysis and discussion of the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defense.
The appellate Court reviewed the record and found the lower court’s factual conclusions to be substantially correct and supported by the evidence.
Appellants failed to show sufficient grounds to disturb the lower court’s factual conclusions.
The lower court se...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether appellants were proven guilty of jueteng-related participation based on the raid evidence and the exhibits

Whether the seized papers and bag, envelopes, and cash constituted “jueteng paraphernalias.”
Whether the evidence showed that appellants participated in the jueteng activity in the place and afternoon of October twenty-one, nineteen hundred and forty-two.
Whether the signed exhibits (Exhibits H, I, and particularly Exhibit J) were credible admissions showing appellants’ intent and involvement.
Whether the defenses denying participation, and explanations for presence, overcame the prosecution evidence and the admissions.

Whether Exhibit J was involuntary or inadmissible due to alleged promise or coercion

Whether Ticzon’s allegation that he signed Exhibit J because he was promised he would be prosecuted only as a mere jueteng bettor warranted rejection of Exhibit J.
Whether Gorostiza’s claim that the chief of police told him to sign Exhibit J to avoid molestation, and the lack of refutation by the instrumental witnesses, rendered Exhibit J inadmissible.
Whether the Court’s factual circumstances surrounding the signing of Exhibit J—lack of arrest at the time, language of the statement, reading by Gorostiza, and the nature of Ticzon’s signatures—justified acceptance of Exhibit J.

Correct application of the penalty for jueteng/gambling under the Revised Penal Code as amended

Whether the lower court’s maximum indeterminate penalty was legally correct.
Whether Article 195, paragraph 2 [c] of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 235, required modifica...(Subscriber-Only)