G.R. No. 5126: THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CATALINO APOSTOL, defendant-appellant.
Date: September 2, 1909

FACTS:
On December 16, 1907, Catalino Apostol and four companions went to a hut where Pedro Tabilisima, Celestino Vergara, and Tranquilino Manipul were living. They questioned the occupants about disappeared carabaos. When the occupants denied knowledge, Apostol and his companions ordered them to leave the hut. As the three men refused, fearing assault, Catalino Apostol set fire to the hut, burning it down. The victims managed to jump out. The hut was described as small, worth P1, and located in an uninhabited area surrounded by fields, far from other houses. The Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija found Apostol guilty under Article 549 of the Penal Code and sentenced him to sixteen years and one day of cadena temporal, indemnity of P1, and costs. Apostol appealed.

ISSUE:
1. Whether there was an absence of proof of criminal intent.
2. Whether Article 549 (arson with persons inside) or Article 554 (arson of an unoccupied habitation in an uninhabited place) of the Penal Code should be applied, considering the hut was in an uninhabited place.

RULING:
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that:
1. On criminal intent: Criminal intent, as well as the will to commit a crime, is always presumed to exist on the part of the person who executes an act which the law punishes, unless the contrary shall appear (Art. 1, Penal Code). The act of setting fire to the hut, especially after ordering the occupants to leave and their refusal, clearly demonstrates criminal intent.
2. On the applicable law: Article 549 of the Penal Code, which punishes “those who shall set fire to any edifice, farmhouse, hut, shed, or vessel in port, with knowledge that one or more persons were within the same,” is the correct provision to apply. Article 554, which refers to an edifice intended for human habitation in an uninhabited place, applies when the edifice is unoccupied. In this case, the victims were explicitly known to be inside the hut when Apostol set it on fire, making Article 549 applicable.

However, the Court recognized the “extreme severity” of the penalty under Article 549 (cadena temporal to cadena perpetua). Therefore, applying Article 2, paragraph 2 of the Penal Code, the Court affirmed the judgment but directed the Clerk of Court to respectfully communicate the decision and sentence to the Governor-General, requesting him to consider using his prerogative to reduce or mitigate the imposed penalty, taking into account the degree of malice and injury caused by the crime.