G.R. No. L-1317, November 23, 1903
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. SIMEON MAGTIBAY, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
The defendant, Simeon Magtibay, was a soldier in the Constabulary stationed at Imus, Cavite. He deserted on October 13, 1902, and was captured on October 27, 1902. Upon his capture, he allegedly told the inspector that he had given the arms he took to “his general, Montalon.” A commission as a second lieutenant, signed by Montalon and dated October 14, 1902, was found on his person. There was evidence that Montalon was in armed rebellion against the Government in October 1902. Magtibay was convicted of treason under Act No. 292 and sentenced to death. At trial, he testified in his own defense, denying desertion and claiming he was forcibly taken by Montalon’s soldiers, given a commission and a revolver, and held against his will for two weeks until his capture.

ISSUE:
Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to convict the defendant of treason under the requirements of Section 9 of the Act of Congress of March 8, 1902.

RULING:
No. The conviction is reversed, and the defendant is acquitted of treason.
Section 9 of the Act of Congress of March 8, 1902, provides that no person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or on confession in open court. The prosecution’s evidence consisted only of the inspector’s testimony regarding Magtibay’s alleged confession at capture and the commission found on him. This did not meet the two-witness requirement for an overt act of treason. Furthermore, the defendant’s testimony at trial, where he explained the circumstances of his being with Montalon’s forces, did not constitute a “confession in open court” as contemplated by the law, which requires a confession of guilt, not merely admissions from which guilt might be inferred. The acquittal is without prejudice to the filing of complaints for other crimes which the evidence may indicate he committed.