Case Digest (G.R. No. 28629)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 28629)
Facts:
The People of the Philippine Islands v. Mandangan, G.R. No. 28629, September 12, 1928, the Supreme Court (Avancena, C.J., Johnson, Malcolm, Villamor, Ostrand, Romualdez, and Villa-Real, JJ., concurring), Street, J., writing for the Court.The plaintiff-appellee was The People of the Philippine Islands; the appellant was Mandangan, one of five accused (the others being Hassim, Sailabi, Jahura and Abisaini). The appellant was prosecuted in the Court of First Instance of Sulu for robbery with homicide, charged with participation in a midnight raid on July 6, 1927 at the house of Moro Maadil in Sitio Tagbak, Maimbung, Province of Jolo, during which Maadil was assaulted and killed and personal property valued at about P1,355.50 was taken.
Prompt Constabulary investigations produced voluntary written confessions by Jahura, Sailabi, and Hassim; Abisaini was turned into a prosecution witness and the case against him was dropped. At trial the three confessed accused pleaded guilty and received sentences (cadena perpetua), while Mandangan alone pleaded not guilty. The prosecution's primary direct evidence against Mandangan consisted of the testimony of Abisaini, who admitted participation and testified that Jahura, Sailabi and Abisaini entered the house and slew Maadil while Mandangan and Hassim remained outside; Abisaini further admitted that he and Jahura inflicted the fatal blows.
Search of Mandangan’s house at the time of his arrest revealed jewelry and clothing from the stolen articles hidden in and under the house. The Court of First Instance found Mandangan guilty of robbery with homicide with aggravating circumstances, sentenced him to death, ordered joint and several indemnity of P1,000 to the heirs of the slain victim, and taxed costs against him. The trial judge did not expressly invoke Article 11 of the Penal Code as amended or the special Mindanao and Sulu provisions in the sentencing, though the three confessing co‑accused were in effect given lesser penalties.
Mandangan appealed the judgment to the Supreme Court. The appeal sought reversal of conviction or, alternatively, reduction of the capital sentence; counsel for appellant urged reduction of the death penalty to cadena perpetua.
Issues:
- Was the evidence sufficient to sustain Mandangan’s conviction for robbery with homicide?
- Did the record justify imposing the death penalty on Mandangan by way of aggravating circumstances (including nocturnity, commission in the dwelling, leadership of a band, and that the offense was committed by more than three armed men), or should the capital sentence be reduced?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)