G.R. No. L-4803, December 19, 1908

FACTS: Balbino Adolfo was charged with perjury for falsely testifying in a prior case (U.S. vs. Tupas) that he did not see Lorenzo Tupas assassinate Raymundo Muñoz. The prosecution proved that Adolfo was present at the assassination and saw Tupas commit the crime. The trial court convicted Adolfo under Article 319 of the Penal Code for giving false testimony in favor of the accused (Tupas).

ISSUE: Did Adolfo’s false testimony “favor” Tupas, as required for conviction under Article 319, when Tupas was ultimately convicted in the original case? Alternatively, what is the proper penalty to be imposed?

RULING: No. The Supreme Court held that for Article 319 to apply, the false testimony must actually have favored the accused. Since Tupas was convicted, Adolfo’s perjury did not prevent the conviction, and, therefore, did not favor Tupas in the sense required by Article 319. However, Adolfo was guilty of giving false testimony not favorable to the accused. Therefore, the court reversed the lower court’s judgment under Art. 319 and found Adolfo guilty under Article 320; for giving false testimony that neither prejudiced not favored Tupas and imposed a penalty of three months of arresto mayor.