Friday, March 27, 2026

GR L 2315; (May, 1906)

🔎 Search our Comprehensive Legal Repository…

G.R. No. L-2315

G.R. No. L-2315 : May 5, 1906

THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
MACARIO GANDOLE, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

Thos. D. Aitken and Robert S. MacDougall, for appellants.
Office of the Solicitor-General Araneta, for appellee.

WILLARD, J.:

The defendants are convicted of the crime of vagrancy, defined and punished in Act No. 519, and were sentenced to imprisonment for nine months and to the payment of a fine of 100 dollars each. The charge in the complaint was that the defendants associated with known thieves or ladrones and wandered about the country at unusual hours of the night.

We agree with the Solicitor-General that the conviction can not be sustained. The only evidence as to Macario Gandole is proof that a band of ladrones came to his house one night when he was sick in bed, and stayed there about two hours, gambling.

The only evidence in the case as to the other defendant, Leon Lovena, is proof that this same band of ladrones on the same night went to his house and stayed there about an hour, gambling. The only witness who testified to this fact stated that the leader of the ladrones took the men from the house of Lovena to the house of one Terciado. It does not clearly appear whether the defendant Lovena was taken with the rest or not.

The judgment of the court below is reversed and the defendants are acquitted, with the costs of both instances de oficio.

After the expiration of ten days from the date of final judgment let the case be remanded to the court below for execution of said judgment. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa, and Carson, JJ., concur.

Batas Pinas

Hot this week

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

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

The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones)

SUBJECT: The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones) I. INTRODUCTION...

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

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

GR 208788; (July, 2024) (Digest)

G.R. No. 208788, July 23, 2024Quezon City Government represented...
⚖️ Armztrong AI Snapshot
📌 Core Doctrine

"Mere association with known thieves at one's home, without evidence of active participation or wandering, does not constitute vagrancy under Act No. 519."

💡 Plain English Summary

The court ruled that simply having thieves visit your house while you're sick or present doesn't make you a vagrant, as there was no proof you were wandering around or involved in their activities. This means you can't be convicted of vagrancy just based on who visits you, unless there's clear evidence you were part of their criminal behavior.

📜 Latin Maxims

Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea | In dubio pro reo

spot_img

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img