Title
People vs Valdes y Guilgan
Case
G.R. No. 14128
Decision Date
Dec 10, 1918
Severino Valdes, a household servant, set multiple fires at his employer’s residence, with evidence and confession proving frustrated arson; Labarro’s charges were dismissed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 14128)

Key Individuals and Context

  • Petitioner: The United States, through the prosecuting attorney
  • Respondent: Severino Valdes y Guilgan, household servant of M. D. Lewin
  • Co-defendant (dismissed): Hugo Labarro y Bunaladi (alias Navarro y Bunadia), stable attendant
  • Victim’s Residence: No. 328 San Rafael Street, San Miguel, Manila
  • Witnesses: Mrs. Auckback (neighbor), Mrs. Lewin (mistress), servant Paulino Banal, Policeman Antonio Garcia del Cid

Procedural History
On May 20, 1918, the Court of First Instance convicted Severino Valdes of arson and sentenced him to six years and one day of presidio mayor, plus half the costs. Hugo Labarro’s proceedings were dismissed. Valdes appealed; the Supreme Court rendered its decision on December 10, 1918.

Factual Background
On April 28, 1918, between 8 and 9 a.m., Mrs. Auckback alerted Mrs. Lewin to smoke emanating from the lower floor of the Lewin residence. The servant Paulino discovered a burning jute sack and rag soaked in kerosene placed against a post and partition in the entresol. At that time Valdes was cleaning inside the house, and Labarro was tending horses.

Arrest and Confession
Police arrested both defendants that morning. At the station, Valdes—per Exhibit C—confessed before several officers that he started the fires, including previous attempts, at Labarro’s instigation and in exchange for one peso per fire. At trial Valdes denied planting the sack and rag and attempted to shift blame to Paulino. He also contradicted his stationhouse admission by claiming he only burned a pile of dry mango leaves.

Legal Issue
Whether Valdes’s acts constituted frustrated arson of an inhabited house under applicable criminal law and whether the evidence supported his conviction.

Applicable Law
Spanish Penal Code (1887):
• Article 549 – Arson of an inhabited house
• Article 3(2) – Criminal attempt provisions
• Article 65 – Classification of frustrated crimes
• Article 57 – Accessory penalties

Court’s Analysis
The Court found uncontradicted proof that Valdes intentionally placed kerosene-soaked materials to ignite the dwelling. His contradictory statements and unsupported accusations against Paulino did not undermine his prior confession or the physical evidence. The attempted burning endangered inhabitants, fulfilling all elements of frustrated arson: he performed all acts necessary to consummate the crime, but timely intervention prevented actual destruction.

Classification of the Off



...continue reading

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