GR 2203; (February, 1905) (Digest)
G.R. No. 2203, February 28, 1905
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. DOMINGO SALCEDO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS:
The defendant, Domingo Salcedo, was charged with the crime of bandolerismo in the Court of First Instance of Ambos Camarines. He was sentenced to twenty years of imprisonment (de presidio) and to pay the costs. Salcedo appealed the decision, arguing that (1) the complaint was insufficient and (2) the evidence was inadequate to support his conviction. The complaint alleged that after November 12, 1902, Salcedo conspired with more than three persons to form a band of ladrones in the mountains of Buhi, armed themselves with deadly weapons, and roamed the highways and countryside to steal carabaos and other personal property through force and violence, in violation of Act No. 518 as amended by Act No. 1121.
ISSUE:
1. Whether the complaint sufficiently alleges the crime of bandolerismo.
2. Whether the evidence presented during trial is sufficient to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING:
1. On the sufficiency of the complaint: The Supreme Court held that the complaint was sufficient. It substantially followed the language of the statute defining bandolerismo, which requires: (a) conspiracy among three or more persons; (b) formation of a band for the purpose of stealing carabaos or other property by force and violence; and (c) going out upon highways and roaming the country armed with deadly weapons for that purpose. The complaint met the requirements of Section 6 of General Orders No. 58, as it enabled a person of common understanding to know the charge and allowed the court to render judgment accordingly.
2. On the sufficiency of the evidence: The Court found the evidence insufficient to sustain a conviction. While the complaint properly alleged all elements of the crime, the proof failed to establish that Salcedo and his companions had conspired to steal carabaos or other property, or that they had gone out upon highways armed for that purpose. The Court noted that in previous bandolerismo cases, conspiracy and criminal purpose could be inferred from acts such as armed roaming and actual theft, but here the evidence did not justify such a conclusion.
DISPOSITIVE:
The judgment of the lower court was REVERSED. Domingo Salcedo was ordered released from custody, with costs de oficio.