Case Digest (G.R. No. L-673)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Aguedo Sardoma et al., G.R. No. L-673, November 28, 1947, the Supreme Court En Banc, Moran, C.J., writing for the Court.The case is a criminal appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Cebu which convicted appellants Aguedo Sardoma, Honorato Gesoro, Daniel Gesoro and Bonifacio Samarana of the complex crime of robbery with homicide. The trial court found the four guilty and sentenced Aguedo Sardoma, Honorato Gesoro and Bonifacio Samarana to reclusion perpetua, ordered them to pay indemnity and to return the money taken; it suspended proceedings as to Daniel Gesoro because he was under eighteen and committed him to the custody of the Director of Public Welfare pending further order (the lower court's dispositive language is reproduced below).
On the night of October 12, 1945, in barrio Bug-ot, Argao, Cebu, Manuel Lanticse was shot through a hole in the kitchen wall and seriously wounded while his common-law wife, Paula Embalsado, was present. According to Paula’s testimony and to a written statement taken down in English by Corporal Armando Alfoja from Manuel’s dying utterances (Exhibit E), two persons (identified as Aguedo and Bonifacio) entered through an opening on top of the kitchen wall and others (Honorato and Daniel Gesoro) came down the stairs; Aguedo is stated to have pointed a pistol at the wounded Manuel, asked “Do I have to finish him?”, and took P71 from Manuel’s waist. Paula was forced at pistol-point to disclose where additional money was kept; Honorato removed P3,000 while Daniel stood guard. Manuel was taken to a hospital and died shortly after; the treating physician testified the wounds caused death.
Following investigation, Honorato Gesoro, Bonifacio Samarana and Daniel Gesoro signed written statements (Exhibits A, B and C) admitting participation; Honorato also executed Exhibit D. At trial each disowned his written statement, claiming they signed under intimidation and maltreatment by the police, and interposed alibis placing them elsewhere that night. The chief of police, the municipal mayor who administered the oaths, and the acting justice of the peace denied any coercion and testified that the statements were voluntarily given and ratified.
Aguedo Sardoma advanced a different alibi, claiming he was in barrio Manga, Alcantara about forty kilometers away on the night in question; nonetheless, a witness placed him in the vicinity early on October 12, and Paula Embalsado and the victim’s dying declaration identified him as one of the assailants.
The trial court found the alibi defenses unpersuasive, credi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Were the extrajudicial statements (Exhibits A–D) voluntarily made and admissible?
- Did the prosecution establish the identity of the assailants and conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt to sustain convictions for robbery with homicide?
- Was the suspension of proceedings and commitment of minor defendant Daniel Gesoro under Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code p...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)