G.R. No. L-7040, March 22, 1912
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAXIMINO GONZALEZ, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The defendants, Maximino Gonzalez and others, were convicted of adultery in the Court of First Instance and sentenced to prision correccional. They appealed the judgment. The appellants argued that the prosecution willfully suppressed the testimony of Sotero Lagatic, an eyewitness to the alleged crime and a relative of the complaining witness. They invoked the legal presumption that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced, under Section 334(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution’s failure to present Sotero Lagatic as a witness gives rise to the presumption that his testimony would have been adverse to the prosecution’s case.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The presumption that suppressed evidence is adverse does not apply merely because the prosecution did not present all available eyewitnesses. The prosecution presented other witnesses whose testimony was amply sufficient to establish the crime. The prosecution is not obliged to present every witness to an act; it may present only those it deems necessary to prove the allegations. Since the testimony of Sotero Lagatic would have been merely corroborative and not indispensable, the presumption invoked by the appellants is inapplicable. The findings of fact in the lower court were supported by the evidence.