Title
People vs. Gimenea
Case
G.R. No. 8168
Decision Date
Mar 25, 1913
A Constabulary sergeant, Francisco Gimenea, was convicted for accepting bribes to facilitate a leper's escape; Supreme Court reaffirmed guilt, adjusted sentence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 8168)

Charges and Sentences

Gimenea was convicted of bribery under Article 382 of the Penal Code, receiving a sentence of imprisonment for one year and three months, a fine of P200, and mandated accessory penalties. In contrast, Sarosad and Senieres were sentenced to three months of arresto mayor and fines of P100 each. The latter two withdrew their appeals, leading to the sole focus on Gimenea's case.

Prosecution's Evidence

The prosecution presented testimonies from Cabilao, his son-in-law Marcelino Perez, and his sons, asserting that a financial arrangement had been made with Gimenea for the escape. On separate occasions, Cabilao indicated he was to give Gimenea various sums of money (P10 initially and P90 later) to facilitate his escape from the hospital. The plan included instructions from Gimenea to Perez to deliver the money under the guise of bringing tobacco for Cabilao.

Defense's Position

The defense introduced testimonies from Constabulary soldiers, including Gimenea, asserting that Cabilao had attempted to escape but had been apprehended without the assistance of the defendants. Gimenea acknowledged borrowing P10 from Perez but denied any connivance surrounding the escape or the acceptance of bribes on the specified dates. The defense contended that the prosecution's witnesses presented inconsistent testimony regarding the amounts involved.

Rebuttal and Conclusion

In rebuttal, the prosecution introduced Victorino Ranas (alias Aranas), a Constabulary soldier who corroborated the prosecution's account by confirming he collected the P10 from Perez for Gimenea, thus supporting the bribery claim. The court found no significant inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses but did acknowledge contradictions in the defense's arguments.

Legal Framework

The court explored the implications of Article 382 of the Penal Code regarding public officials accepting gifts for committing injustices. Consequently, given the defendants' duties to ensure the quarantine of Cabil

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.