Title
People vs. Saliente
Case
G.R. No. L-2427
Decision Date
Jun 28, 1949
Defendants forcibly detained Juana Briones for two nights, intending to coerce her into marriage. Despite claims of consent and alibi, courts found them guilty of slight illegal detention, citing aggravating circumstances and rejecting defenses.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-2427)

Applicable Law

The applicable law in this case is anchored in the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 18, which deals with illegal detention. The specific reference is to Article 268, with particular attention to the provisions related to slight illegal detention.

Factual Background

On the evening of November 4, 1946, Saliente and Montilla arrived at the residence of Telesfora Alentejo, seeking to take her niece, Juana Briones, under the pretense of an order from their "chief." When she refused to comply, threats were made against her life using a bolo and a pistol. Juana was forcibly taken to Saliente's house, where it was later revealed that the initial claim of a request from their chief was a ruse to facilitate Montilla’s desire to persuade her to marry him.

Circumstances of Detention

Juana was held at Saliente's house for approximately two nights and one day. During this time, her honor was evidently preserved, attributed to the presence of Saliente's wife. Eventually, Juana persuaded her captors to bring her to her brother, Brigido Enclona, for discussion. However, the defendants returned that evening and forcibly removed her once again.

Defendants' Defense

Montilla contended that Juana consented to leave with him, claiming they had exchanged notes regarding their elopement. This defense was corroborated by witnesses who allegedly observed these notes. However, the trial court rejected this claim, noting inconsistencies including that neither Montilla nor Juana could read or write, thus questioning the authenticity of the purported notes.

Trial Court Proceedings

The trial court’s rejection of Montilla’s defense was bolstered by the fact that the defendants were armed and had expected resistance, indicating that Juana had not consented to her detention. Saliente's alibi lacked credible supporting evidence, relying solely on biased testimony from himself and his mother. The trial court found no significant grounds for asserting a grudge that would motivate Juana to falsely implicate Saliente.

Legal Determinations

It was argued that the trial court lacked jurisdiction due to a claimed double jeopardy arising from a prior provisional dismissal of the case. The court found this argument unsubstantiated based on the record, which did not provide concrete evidence for the alleged double jeopardy claims.

Conclusion and Sentencing

The court determin

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.