Saturday, March 28, 2026

GR 1053; (May, 1903)

🔎 Search our Comprehensive Legal Repository...

G.R. No. 1053

G.R. No. 1053 : May 7, 1903

THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee,

vs.
MAMERTO VARGAS, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

Thomas L. Hartigan, for appellants.
Solicitor-General Araneta, for appellee.

WILLARD, J.:

Simeon Alberto on May 20, 1902, was attacked and severely wounded. To the persons who went to his assistance he stated that the defendants had assaulted him. He said nothing of the motive. He died the next day. There was no other evidence for the Government. Manalastas was acquitted by the court below. The defendant Vargas testified that, on returning to his house on the day in question, he found Alberto lying with his (the defendant’s) wife; that he drew his bolo; Alberto escaped through the window; that he, the defendant, pursued him, overtook him, and killed him. There was evidence that the relations existing between Alberto and the wife of the defendant had been the subject of common talk in the barrio.

The judge below apparently believed the testimony of the defendant, but, being of the opinion, that article 423 of the Penal Code was not applicable, sentenced the defendant to eight years of prision mayor.

We agree with the court as to the facts, but not as to the application of said article 423.

This article fixes the penalty of destierro when the husband kills the offender, “in the act.” In this case the discovery, the escape, the pursuit, and the killing were all parts of one continuous act.

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the defendant Vargas is condemned to the penalty of destierro for the term of two years four months and one day, to pay the heirs of the deceased 1,000 pesos, and in case of insolvency to subsidiary destierro for a term which can not exceed one-third of the above penalty, he being prohibited from entering in a radius of 25 kilometers from the barrio of Santa Monica, in the pueblo of Floridablana, in the Province of Pampanga, during the term aforesaid, with costs to the appellant.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Mapa and Ladd, JJ., concur.
McDonough, J., did not sit in this case.

Batas Pinas

spot_img

Hot this week

GR 3257; (March, 1907)

PETRONA CAPISTRANO, ET AL. vs. ESTATE OF JOSEFA GABINO

The Lien and the Legacy: Fidelity to the Word in GR L 2024

The Lien and the Legacy: Fidelity to the...

GR 223572; (November, 2020)

JENNIFER M. ENANO-BOTE, VIRGILIO A. BOTE, JAIME M. MATIBAG, WILFREDO L. PIMENTEL, TERESITA M. ENANO, PETITIONERS, VS. JOSE CH. ALVAREZ, CENTENNIAL AIR, INC. AND SUBIC BAY METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY, RESPONDENTS

The Prophetic Mandate and the Weight of Judgment in G.R. No. 272006

The Prophetic Mandate and the Weight of Judgment in...

The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones)

SUBJECT: The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones) I. INTRODUCTION...
⚖️ Case Intelligence
📌 Core Doctrine

"Article 423 of the Penal Code applies to reduce the penalty to destierro when a husband kills an offender 'in the act' of adultery, as the discovery, pursuit, and killing constitute one continuous act."

💡 Plain English

In this case, a husband caught his wife with another man, chased him, and killed him right after. The court ruled that this all happened as part of a single event, so the husband got a lighter punishment instead of a long prison sentence.

📜 Legal Maxim

Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea | In flagrante delicto

Verified AI Snapshot

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img
Previous article
Next article