People v. Dalawan
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The defendant, Maximo Dalawan, was charged with the crime of bandolerismo. The complaint alleged that he was a member of the band of Julian Santos, which comprised more than three individuals dedicated to robbing carabaos and other personal property through force and violence. This band allegedly roamed the highways armed with deadly weapons in the Province of Bulacan during the latter months of 1902 and the early months of 1903. Procedural History: The defendant was tried in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Bulacan in October 1903. He was found guilty of the crime charged and sentenced to twenty-four years of imprisonment and to pay the costs of the suit. The Appeal: The defendant appealed the decision of the Court of First Instance to the Supreme Court, challenging his conviction for bandolerismo.
Issue(s)
Whether the evidence presented sufficiently proves the guilt of the accused for the crime of bandolerismo. Whether the accused was a member of the armed band described in the complaint.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, finding the defendant guilty of the crime of bandolerismo and sentencing him to imprisonment for twenty-four years and to pay the costs of both instances.
Ratio Decidendi
On Whether the evidence presented sufficiently proves the guilt of the accused for the crime of bandolerismo: The Court found that the evidence established the existence of an armed band of more than three persons in the Province of Bulacan and Pasig during December 1902 and the months of January, February, and March 1903. This band was commanded by General San Miguel, Faustino Guillermo, and Julian Santos. The evidence also showed that the band was organized for the purpose of stealing carabaos and other personal property, and that it did, on several occasions, enter various pueblos in the said provinces and steal carabaos, money, and other personal property. Furthermore, the band went out upon the highways and roamed over the country, armed with deadly weapons. These findings satisfy all the elements of the crime of bandolerismo as defined by law and jurisprudence. On Whether the accused was a member of the armed band described in the complaint: The testimonies of Ricardo Aquino, Gervasio Gimenez, Venancio Bartolome, and Enrique Pasion provided substantial evidence of the accused's membership in the band. Ricardo Aquino testified that the accused was a member of Julian Santos' band, which detained him for about a month, and that he frequently saw the accused consulting with Julian Santos. Gervasio Gimenez, a detective, saw the accused in the mountains near Bagbag with Julian Santos' band and noted that the accused was nearly always seen with Julian Santos. Venancio Bartolome testified to seeing the accused armed with about one hundred others in the band. Enrique Pasion stated that the accused was with Faustino Guillermo's band for about one month, and this band attacked several pueblos and committed robberies. Although the defense presented witnesses who claimed not to have seen the accused in the band, their credibility was diminished as they were prisoners and admitted members of the band themselves. The defendant's general denial was insufficient to overcome the positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the evidence sufficiently established the accused's membership in the band.
Main Doctrine
The crime of bandolerismo, as defined under Article 306 of the Revised Penal Code, requires proof of the existence of an armed band composed of more than three persons, organized for the purpose of committing robbery, and that said band went out upon the highways and roamed the country armed with deadly weapons. Membership in such a band, even if not directly participating in every robbery, is sufficient for conviction if the accused is shown to be part of the organization and its activities.