G.R. No. and Date: G.R. No. L-12990; January 21, 1918

FACTS:
On the night of October 22, 1915, Doroteo Natividad’s carabao, valued at ₱150, was stolen from his corral in Tanauan, Batangas. On November 20, 1915, a Constabulary patrol led by Sergeant Presa (since deceased) encountered the accusedLazaro Javier, Apolinario Mendoza, and Placido de Chavezleading the carabao. Upon seeing the Constabulary, the accused fled. The following day, the carabao was found tied in front of a house in San Pablo, Laguna, and was positively identified by Natividad as his stolen property and by the Constabulary as the animal seen in the accused’s possession. During the trial, the prosecution offered Exhibit B, the sworn statement of the deceased Sergeant Presa taken before a justice of the peace, as evidence. The defense objected, arguing that its admission violated the accused’s constitutional right to confront witnesses.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the accused’s guilt for the crime of theft was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the trial court erred in admitting Exhibit B (the sworn statement of the deceased Sergeant Presa) in evidence, in violation of the accused’s right to confront witnesses.

RULING:
1. On the Proof of Guilt: The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The accused were found in possession of the recently stolen carabao and failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for such possession. This, coupled with the positive identification of the carabao by its owner and the Constabulary, constituted sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under the doctrine of recent unexplained possession of stolen property.

2. On the Admissibility of Exhibit B: The Supreme Court held that the trial court erred in admitting Exhibit B. The sworn statement was taken without the accused being present and without any opportunity for cross-examination. It did not fall under any recognized exception to the constitutional right of confrontation (e.g., testimony in a former proceeding, dying declaration, or part of a preliminary examination where cross-examination was possible). Mere necessity due to the witness’s death does not justify its admission. However, this error was deemed harmless because the remaining competent evidencethe testimonies of the carabao owner and the Constabulary soldierswas overwhelming and sufficient to sustain the conviction independently of the inadmissible exhibit.

Disposition: The judgment of conviction was affirmed. The accused were each sentenced to four years, two months, and one day of presidio correccional, with accessory penalties, and to pay one-third of the costs. The carabao was ordered returned to Doroteo Natividad.

This is AI (Gemini and Deepseek) Generated. Please Double Check. Powered by Armztrong.