G.R. No. L-2434

FACTS:
Bernardo Boac was convicted by the lower court of violating Section 4 of Act No. 518 (the Brigandage Law) for knowingly aiding a band of brigands by furnishing them with rice. The conviction was based on evidence gathered by the Constabulary after they attacked a bandit rendezvous on a hemp farm owned by one Gamboa, a known brigand chief. At the scene, they found a sack of rice with Boac’s hat and personal cedula on top, and a box containing a memorandum listing his name alongside figures. Boac later surrendered, admitting he was at the camp but claiming he had been captured by the brigands earlier that day while working in Gamboa’s fields and escaped during the Constabulary attack.

ISSUE:
Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bernardo Boac knowingly aided and abetted a band of brigands by furnishing them with rice.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and acquitted the accused. The evidence was purely circumstantial and insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The presence of Boac’s personal effects near the rice did not prove he furnished it, and his presence at the camp was adequately explained by his claim of recent capture, which was uncontradicted. His employment as a laborer on Gamboa’s farm and the appearance of his name on a memorandum were reasonably explained by that employer-employee relationship and did not demonstrate sympathy with or aid to the brigands. The prosecution failed to overcome the presumption of innocence.