EN BANC
THE UNITED STATES,
Complainant-Appellee,
G.
R.
No. 1193
March
4, 1905
-versus-
JOSEPH HOWARD,
Defendant-Appellant.
D E C I S I
O N
TORRES, J:
In a Complaint
dated November
10, 1902, Joseph Howard, Joe Williams, John Mack, and Charles Nailor
were
charged by the Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga with the crime of robbery.
The Complaint stated that while Bernardino de Jesus, an employee of the
railway, and his servant, Segundo Meneses, were in the station of said
railway at Angeles, at about 7 o'clock in the evening of the 2d of
November,
three Americans entered the same; that they were armed with revolvers;
that the two of the defendants aimed their revolvers at said employee
and
his servant while the other went to the place where the safe was
located
and took the same, with the money contained therein, amounting to
165.47
Pesos, Mexican; that they then left immediately, carrying said sum
away,
and in order to facilitate their exit they broke the door which opens
upon
the platform facing the town of Mabalacat; all contrary to law. The
case
having come on to tried, one of the defendants, John Mack, having
escaped
(folio 15), the court, at the request of the defense, ordered the case
to proceed as to the other three defendants present, separating the
trial
as to the absent defendant. As a result of the trial, judgment was
rendered
on the 2d day of December, 1902, in which Joseph Howard and Joe
Williams
were sentenced as principals in the crime of robbery to eight years and
eleven months of presidio mayor, with the accessories provided
for
in article 57, to return, jointly and severally, the amount taken, to
wit,
143.52 pesos, Mexican, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of their
failure to pay said sum, on account of the nature of the principal
penalty
imposed, and to each pay one-third of the costs. Charles Nailor was
acquitted,
with the remaining costs de oficio. The judgment also provided
that
the sum of 21.91 pesos deposited with the clerk should be returned to
the
employee of the railway station at Angeles. This judgment became final
as regards William and Nailor, and was appealed from by Howard. This
Court,
by Resolution taken July 13, 1903 [folio 32], suspended the sentence
and
returned the case to the court below for a new trial.
From the
evidence
adduced
in the trial it appears that on the evening of the 2d of November of
said
year three Americans came to the said station; that these Americans
were
Joseph Howard, Joe Williams, and John Mack; that they came there under
the pretext of changing some bank notes which they did not show; that
immediately
one of them threatened said Bernardino de Jesus, pointing his revolver
at him, and another of them did likewise toward Segundo Meneses, while
the third went immediately to where the safe was located and took it,
with
all the money contained therein, amounting to 165.47 4/8 pesos,
Mexican,
and then immediately left in the direction of the town of Mabalacat.
These
acts characterize the crime as that of robbery with intimidation of
person
as provided for and punished in Article 502 and Paragraph 5 of Article
503 of the Penal Code. The three defendants, with the intention of
profiting
thereby, took possession of the money belonging to another by means of
intimidation and contrary to the will of the employee of said station
in
charge of the collection of money, whom they threatened with their
revolvers.
These facts constitute the crime of robbery punished by Paragraph 5 of
Article 503 of the Penal Code with presidio correccional to presidio
mayor in its medium degree. Having come up here on the appeal of
the
defendant Howard only, this court can not take into consideration in
rendering
its decision anything regarding Williams and Charles Nailor, of whom
the
former has been sentenced and the latter acquitted by final judgment.
The
court will not take into consideration anything regarding John Mack,
against
whom there is a separate case.
The
liability of Joseph
Howard is fully proven. The two eyewitness of the crime of robbery,
Bernardino
de Jesus and Segundo Meneses, in their testimony corroborate each
other,
that Howard was the third party who took the safe containing the money
while the other two were aiming their arms at said two witnesses; they
pointed at him several times during the trial and gave many details as
to how they identified him, in spite of the surprise and fright they
had
at the time the robbery took place, and notwithstanding also the fact
that
the defendant had grown a beard. They identified him because the
defendant,
together with his codefendants, used to come to the station and sit on
some pieces of lumber in the rear of same. It is true that the persons
who came in answer to the cries for help of the two injured parties did
not find the robbers, but they saw them running at a great distance;
they
did not try to follow, because they knew the robbers were armed, but
three
or four days afterwards the latter were captured, together with Nailor,
near the San Fernando station, and the sum of 21.91 Pesos, Mexican, was
found in their possession and also two revolvers. There is, therefore,
sufficient evidence in the case to justify the penalty imposed upon the
defendants. In the commission of the crime we must consider the
existence
of the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity, without any extenuating
circumstance present to offset the effects of the former, and therefore
the penalty which the defendant has incurred should be imposed in its
maximum
degree.
As for
the rest, the
Complaint is valid and there is no defect tending to prejudice the
rights
of the defendant. Section 5 of General Orders No. 58, does not require
the complaint to be sworn to by the prosecuting attorney. In that
complaint
Joseph Howard and others were charged with the crime for which he is
now
prosecuted, and if the trial developed the respective participation
which
each of the defendants took in the robbery, failure to express these
details
in the complaint does not prejudice the rights of this defendant, who,
being one of the accused persons in said robbery, came in and presented
his defense and declared in his own behalf without having taken
exception
to said complaint. Therefore, in this court he can not raise any
question
whatever as to the validity of the complaint.
Therefore,
by virtue
of the reasons above stated, and also those stated by the court below
in
its judgment of October 5, 1903, we are of the opinion that the
judgment
below should be affirmed and the defendant, Joseph Howard, sentenced to
eight years and eleven months of presidio mayor, with the
accessories
provided in Article 57 of the Penal Code, to return, jointly and
severally
with his codefendants, Joe Williams and John Mack, to the employee of
the
station of Angeles the amount of 143.52 Pesos, Mexican, unrecovered,
without
having to suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency on
account
of the nature of the principal penalty, and to pay one-third of the
costs;
and that delivery be made to the employee of the railway of the sum of
21.91 Pesos, Mexican, deposited with the clerk. This case to be
remanded
to the court below with a certified copy of this decision and of the
judgment
which shall be rendered in accordance herewith. So ordered.
Arellano, C.J.,
Mapa, Johnson and Carson, JJ., concur. |