GR 1297; (March, 1904) (Digest)
G.R. No. 1297 : March 28, 1904
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. JULIO MENDOZA, ET AL., defendants-appellants.
FACTS:
On or about March 21, 1903, defendants Julio Mendoza, Santiago Santos, and Cirilo Cueto detained Mateo Ventura, an 11-year-old boy. The detention arose after Cueto caught Ventura for allegedly setting fire to paper in a public water-closet. Cueto first took Ventura to the police station, where Corporal Simplicio Jadoc, finding the charge unfounded, released him. Despite this release, the defendants took Ventura to the office of the pail system station in Tondo. There, Santos and Cueto slapped and struck him. Santos then bound Ventura’s hands and feet with a rope, tying him to a post, where he remained for about twelve hours, watched by Mendoza, until his release the following morning. The boy’s body bore marks from the ropes. The defendants, who were not peace officers, lacked any authority to make such an arrest or detention.
ISSUE:
Whether the defendants are guilty of the crime of illegal detention as defined and punished under Article 483 of the Penal Code.
RULING:
Yes, the defendants are guilty of illegal detention. The Supreme Court found that the facts, established by credible testimony and the confessions of two defendants, constituted the crime under Article 483 of the Penal Code. The defendants, without authority and without just cause, apprehended and detained the minor, Mateo Ventura. The Court rejected the defense that the detention was to deliver the boy to the authorities, noting that the police had already investigated and released him, and the defendants’ subsequent actionstaking him to their office, maltreating him, and binding him to a postwere unlawful. The aggravating circumstance of unnecessary cruelty (Article 10, No. 6 of the Penal Code) was present due to the maltreatment inflicted on the child, with no mitigating circumstances. Accordingly, the penalty was imposed in its maximum degree. The trial court’s sentence was reversed, and each defendant was sentenced to six months of arresto mayor, the accessories under Article 61, a fine of 1,250 pesetas (with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency), and to pay one-third of the costs each.