Case Digest (G.R. No. 38434)
Facts:
People of the Philippine Islands v. Marciano Medina y Diokno, G.R. No. 38434, December 23, 1933, the Supreme Court, Vickers, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellee was the People of the Philippine Islands; the defendant-appellant was Marciano Medina y Diokno (alias Mariano Medina, alias Alejandro Dola). The appeal arose from a judgment of Judge Anacleto Diaz of the Court of First Instance of Manila convicting the defendant of robbery in an inhabited house and declaring him a habitual delinquent. The trial court imposed a principal penalty of ten years and one day of prision mayor, an additional penalty of ten years of prision mayor for recidivism, ordered indemnity to James C. Rockwell in the amount of P320, and assessed costs.The information charged that on the night of February 12, 1932 at the dwelling of James C. Rockwell in Pasay the accused broke through a window and stole two watches valued at P320; it further averred the accused previously had three theft convictions. At trial the accused pleaded not guilty, admitted the house had been robbed and that a small silver box taken from Mrs. Rockwell’s room was later found in the garden and bore a fingerprint on its top, but denied being the perpetrator and offered an alibi that he was at home in San Luis, Batangas with a sore foot.
The prosecution produced Agripino Ruiz, a Constabulary fingerprint expert, who compared a photograph of the impression on the box with a photograph of the impression of the defendant’s right middle finger taken while the defendant was under arrest for another burglary; Ruiz testified there were ten points of coincidence and concluded the impressions were from the same person. The household members’ fingerprints did not match the box impression. The trial co...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the fingerprint evidence sufficient to identify the accused beyond a reasonable doubt?
- Did the evidence support conviction for robbery in an inhabited house and the assessment of penalties (including recidivism), and were the penalties imp...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)