G.R. No. L-6614, February 14, 1912
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ONOFRE ODRUÑA, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On May 11, 1900, during a religious festival in Sapian, Capiz, appellants, led by Leocadio Pajarillo and armed with guns, bolos, and other weapons, robbed Elias Oro and others. They seized Oro’s trunk containing $700 Mexican currency and jewelry worth $150, 800 cavanes of rice worth $2,500, $300 cash from Oro’s wife, and 36 carabaos worth $1,920. They also took two carabaos from Gregorio Nuñez. Oro was beaten, bound, and detained overnight. Appellants were convicted of robbery in an armed band but claimed entitlement to amnesty under the July 4, 1902, Amnesty Proclamation.

ISSUE

Whether appellants are entitled to the benefits of the Amnesty Proclamation of July 4, 1902, for the crime of robbery in an armed band.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and dismissed the case, granting appellants amnesty. The Court distinguished this case from U.S. vs. Pajarillo, where amnesty was denied for murder due to evidence of a personal motive (e.g., paramour relationship). Here, no such personal motive was proven. The evidence indicated the seized property was intended for the revolutionary movement’s support, making the robbery political in character. Thus, appellants, having participated in the insurrection and committed an offense political in nature, qualified for amnesty under the proclamation.