Tuesday, March 23, 2010

People vs Felipe Kalalo, et.al.

Chester Cabalza recommends his visitors to please read the original & full text of the case cited. Xie xie!

People vs Felipe Kalalo, et.al.
G.R. Nos. 39303-39305
March 17, 1934

Facts:

On November 10, 1932, the appellants namely, Felipe Kalalo, Marcelo Kalalo, Juan Kalalo, and Gregorio Ramos, were tried in the Batangas jointly with Alejandro Garcia, Fausta Abrenica and Alipia Abrenica in criminal cases Nos. 6858, 6859 and 6860, the first two for murder, and the last for frustrated murder. Upon agreement of the parties said three cases were tried together and after the presentation of their respective evidence, the said court acquitted Alejandro Garcia, Fausta Abrenica and Alipia Abrenica, and sentenced the other appellants.

Issue:

W/O accused-appellants are liable of the crimes of murder and discharge of firearms?

Held:

The first case is, for the alleged murder of Marcelino Panaligan, to seventeen years, four months and one day of reclusion temporal, with the corresponding accessory penalties, and to indemnify the heirs of the said deceased Marcelino Panaligan in the sum of P1,000, with the costs.

The second case is, for the alleged murder of Arcadio Holgado, to seventeen years, four months and one day of reclusion temporal, with the corresponding accessory penalties, and to indemnify the heirs of the aforesaid victim, the deceased Arcadio Holgado, in the sum of P1,000, with the costs.

In the third case, that is, the court held that the crime committed was simply that of discharge of firearm, not frustrated murder, the appellant Marcelo Kalalo was sentenced to one year, eight months and twenty-one days of prision correccional and to pay the proportionate part of the costs of the proceedings. Felipe Kalalo and Juan Kalalo, as well as their co-accused Fausta and Alipia Abrenica, Gregorio Ramos and Alejandro Garcia, were acquitted of the charges therein.

In all other respects, the appealed sentences in the said three cases are hereby affirmed without prejudice to crediting the appellants therein with one-half of the time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment, in accordance with article 29 of the Revised Penal Code. So ordered.

No comments: