[No. 7037. March 15, 1912.] THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff and appellee, vs. J !E LAUREL ET "#.

, defendant$ and appellant$.

1. 1.%&'!T&"TE( M'&(E&) E*+(EN,E) -& * ,"T+ N../hen the

e0idence in a ca$e cla$$ified a$ fr1$trated 21rder i$ contradictor3, it i$ nece$$ar3 to rel3 1pon the detail$ a$ $ho4n 53 circ12$tantial e0idence to deter2ine 4hich of the partie$ 6a0e the pro0ocation and 5e6an the a$$a1lt. 1. 2.+(. ) +(. ) +(..,on$iderin6 the precedin6 relation$ 5et4een the contendin6 partie$, it i$ the offended part3 4ho 4a$ directl3 or indirectl3 affected and 4ho 4o1ld nat1rall3 5e intere$ted in de2andin6 an e7planation and therefore in $ee8in6 the inter0ie4, $o that 4hen the3 2eet it i$ to 5e pre$12ed that $1ch offended part3, 4hen not $ati$fied 4ith the e7planation offered, 4o1ld 5e the a66re$$or, and thi$ pre$12ption i$ confir2ed 53 the e0idence. 1. 3.+(.) !E#%9(E%EN!E.." per$on 4ho 1$e$ a poc8et98nife to $erio1$l3 4o1nd another 4ho hit$ hi2 on the head 4ith a cane and contin1e$ $o to 5eat hi2 e2plo3$ rational 2ean$ of $elf9defen$e. 1. :.+(.) +(.) E;EM-T+ N %& M ,&+M+N"#. &E!- N!+<+#+T=.. ,o2plete e7e2ption fro2 cri2inal re$pon$i5ilit3 1nder No. : of article > of the -enal ,ode carrie$ 4ith it al$o 1nder No. 5 thereof the $a2e e7e2ption for t4o near relati0e$ of the per$on a$$a1lted 4ho inter0ened in hi$ defen$e 4hen he 4a$ 1nla4f1ll3 attac8ed and p1r$1ed 53 hi$ a$$ailant.

"--E"# fro2 a ?1d62ent of the ,o1rt of %ir$t +n$tance of <atan6a$. ,1i, J. The fact$ are $tated in the opinion of the co1rt. O'Brien & DeWitt, for appellant$. Attorney-General Villamor, for appellee. T &&E!, J.@ Thi$ appeal 4a$ rai$ed 53 the fo1r a5o0e9na2ed defendant$, fro2 the ?1d62ent of con0iction, fo1nd on pa6e 117 of the record, rendered 53 the Honora5le Mariano ,1i. The fact$ in thi$ ca$e are a$ follo4$@ n the ni6ht of (ece25er 2A,1909, 4hile the 6irl ,oncepciBn #at 4a$ 4al8in6 alon6 the $treet, on her 4a3 fro2 the ho1$e of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, $it1ated in the p1e5lo of Tana1an, -ro0ince of <atan6a$, acco2panied 53 $e0eral 3o1n6 people, $he 4a$ approached 53 Jo$e Laurel 4ho $1ddenl3 8i$$ed her and i22ediatel3 thereafter ran off in the direction of hi$ ho1$e,

p1r$1ed 53 the 6irlD$ co2panion$, a2on6 4ho2 4a$ the 2a$ter of the ho1$e a5o0e 2entioned, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo) 51t the3 did not o0erta8e hi2. n the $econd ni6ht after the occ1rrence ?1$t related, that i$, on the 2>th, 4hile E7eC1iel ,a$tillo and Jo$e Laurel, to6ether 4ith (o2in6o -an6ani5an and $e0eral other$ of the defendant$, 4ere at an entertain2ent held on an 1pper floor of the parochial 51ildin6 of the $aid p1e5lo and attended 53 2an3 re$ident$ of the to4n, it i$ alle6ed that the $aid ,a$tillo and Laurel 4ere in0ited 53 -an6ani5an, the for2er thro16h hi$ 5rother, &oC1e ,a$tillo, and the latter, directl3, to co2e o1t into the 3ard, 4hich the3 did, acco2panied 53 -an6ani5an and the other defendant$ referred to. "fter the e7chan6e of a fe4 4ord$ and e7planation$ concernin6 the 8i$$ 6i0en the 6irl #at on the ni6ht of the 2Ath of that 2onth, a C1arrel aro$e 5et4een 7 25: -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

254

United States vs. Laurel. the $aid Jo$e Laurel and E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, in 4hich (o2in6o -an6ani5an, *icente Earcia, and ,onrado Laurel too8 part, and a$ a re$1lt of the C1arrel E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4a$ $erio1$l3 4o1nded. He $1cceeded in reachin6 a dr16 $tore near 53 4here he recei0ed fir$t aid treat2ent) Jo$e Laurel al$o recei0ed t4o $li6ht 4o1nd$ on the head. (r. !i7to &o?a$, 4ho 5e6an to render 2edical a$$i$tance to E7eC1iel ,a$tillo earl3 in the 2ornin6 of the follo4in6 da3, $tated that hi$ e7a2ination of the latterD$ in?1rie$ di$clo$ed a 4o1nd in the left $ide of the che$t, on a le0el 4ith the fo1rth ri5, fro2 3 to : centi2eter$ in depth, reachin6 into the l1n6) another 4o1nd in the 5ac8 of the left ar2 and in the cond1it thro16h 4hich the 1lnar ner0e pa$$e$, fro2 10 to 11 centi2eter$ in len6th, penetratin6 to the 5one and in?1rin6 the ner0e$ and arterie$ of the $aid re6ion, e$peciall3 the 1lnar ner0e, 4hich 4a$ $e0ered) a cont1$ion on the ri6ht te2ple, acco2panied 53 ecch32o$i$ and he2orrha6e of the ti$$1e$ of the e3e) and, finall3, another cont1$ion in the 5ac8 of the a5do2en near the left ca0it3, 4hich 53 reaction in?1red the $to2ach and the ri6ht ca0it3. "ccordin6 to the opinion of the ph3$ician a5o0e na2ed, the 4o1nd in the left $ide of the 5rea$t 4a$ $erio1$ on acco1nt of it$ ha0in6 f1ll3

penetrated the l1n6$ and ca1$ed the patient to $pit 5lood, a$ noticed the da3 after he 4a$ 4o1nded, and there 21$t ha0e 5een a he2orrha6e of the l1n6, an i2portant 0ital 0a$c1lar or6an) 53 rea$on of thi$ he2orrha6e or 6eneral infection the patient 4o1ld ha0e died, had it not 5een for the ti2el3 2edical aid rendered hi2. The 4o1nd on the 5ac8 of the left ar2 4a$ al$o of a $erio1$ nat1re, a$ the 1lnar ner0e 4a$ c1t, 4ith the re$1lt that the little and rin6 fin6er$ of the patientD$ left hand ha0e 5een rendered per2anentl3 1$ele$$. /ith re$pect to the cont1$ion on the ri6ht te2ple, it co1ld ha0e 5een $erio1$, accordin6 to the 8ind of 5lo4$ recei0ed, and the cont1$ion on the 5ac8 of the a5do2en 4a$ dia6no$ed a$ $erio1$ al$o, on acco1nt of it$ ha0in6 ca1$ed an in?1r3 a$ a re$1lt of 4hich the 4o1nded 2an co2plained of $e0ere pain$ in the $to2ach and left $pleen. The $aid ph3$ician $tated * #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 255 United States vs. Laurel. that he had attended the patient for fo1rteen con$ec1ti0e da3$) that the cont1$ion on the a5do2en 4a$ c1red in fo1r or fi0e da3$, and that on the ri6ht te2ple in ten or t4el0e da3$, altho16h thi$ latter in?1r3 4a$ acco2panied 53 a con$idera5le ecch32o$i$ 4hich 2i6ht not di$appear for a5o1t three 2onth$, the ti2e reC1ired for the a5$orption of the coa61lated 5lood) that the $titche$ in the 4o1nd of the left ar2 4ere ta8en o1t after t4el0e da3$, and 4hen 4itne$$ cea$ed to attend the patient, thi$ 4o1nd 4a$ healin6 1p and f or it$ co2plete c1re 4o1ld reC1ire ei6ht or 2ore da3$D ti2e) and that the 4o1nd in the 5rea$t, for the rea$on that it had alread3 healed internall3 and the dan6er of infection had di$appeared, 4a$ healin6, altho16h $till 2ore ti2e 4o1ld 5e reC1ired f or it$ co2plete c1re, the patient 5ein6 a5le to contin1e the treat2ent hi2$elf, 4hich in fact he did. +n 0ie4 of the $tri8in6l3 contradictor3 e0idence add1ced 53 the pro$ec1tion and 53 the defen$e, and in order to decide 4hat 4ere the tr1e fact$ of the ca$e 4e $hall proceed to recite the te$ti2on3 of the part3 4ho 4a$ $erio1$l3 4o1nded and of hi$ 4itne$$e$, and after4ard$, that of hi$ alle6ed a$$ailant$ and of their 4itne$$e$, in order to deter2ine the nat1re of the cri2e, the circ12$tance$ that conc1rred therein and, in t1rn, the re$pon$i5ilit3 of the cri2inal or

255

cri2inal$. E7eC1iel ,a$tillo te$tified that 4hile he, to6ether 4ith -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, 4a$ in the hall of the parochial 51ildin6 of Tana1an, attendin6 an entertain2ent on the ni6ht of (ece25er 2>, 1909, he 4a$ approached 53 hi$ 5rother, &oC1e ,a$tillo, 4ho told hi2, on the part of (o2in6o -an6ani5an, that Jo$e Laurel de$ired to $pea8 4ith hi2 and 4a$ a4aitin6 hi2 on the 6ro1nd floor of the $aid 51ildin6, to 6i0e hi2 an e7planation 4ith re6ard to hi$ G LaurelD$H ha0in6 8i$$ed ,oncepciBn #at on the ni6ht of the 2Ath in the $treet and in the pre$ence of the 4itne$$ and other 3o1n6 people) that the 4itne$$, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, therefore, left the parochial 51ildin6, acco2panied 53 hi$ 5rother &oC1e and -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, and 2et !ofronio *ela$co, Ea1dencio Earcia, and "lfon$o Torre$, at the 25A -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

256

United States vs. Laurel. $treet door) that after he had 4aited there for half an ho1r, Jo$e Laurel, ,onrado Laurel, *icente Earcia, Jo$e Earcia, and (o2in6o -an6ani5an, li8e4i$e ca2e do4n o1t of the 51ildin6 and Jo$e Laurel approached hi2 and i22ediatel3 too8 hi2 a$ide, a4a3 fro2 the door of the 51ildin6 and the other$) that Laurel then $aid to hi2 that, 5efore 2a8in6 an3 e7planation$ relati0e to the $aid offen$e a6ain$t the 6irl ,oncepcion #at, he 4o1ld a$8 hi2 4hether it 4a$ tr1e that he Gthe 4itne$$, ,a$tilloH had in hi$ po$$e$$ion $o2e letter$ addre$$ed 53 Laurel to the $aid 6irl, to 4hich the 4itne$$ replied that a$ a 6entle2an he 4a$ not o5li6ed to an$4er the C1e$tion) that there1pon Jo$e Laurel $1ddenl3 $tr1c8 hi2 a 5lo4 in the left $ide of the 5rea$t 4ith a 8nife, 4here1pon the 4itne$$, feelin6 that he 4a$ 4o1nded, $tr1c8 in t1rn 4ith the cane he 4a$ carr3in6 at hi$ a$$ailant, 4ho dod6ed and i22ediatel3 $tarted to r1n) there1pon 4itne$$ recei0ed another 8nife thr1$t in the left ar2 follo4ed 53 a 5lo4 in the left $ide fro2 a fi$t and 4itne$$, 1pon t1rnin6, $a4 *icente Earcia and (o2in6o -an6ani5an in the act of a6ain a$$a1ltin6 hi2) ?1$t then he 4a$ $tr1c8 a 5lo4 4ith a cane on hi$ ri6ht te2ple and, on t1rnin6, $a4 5ehind hi2 ,onrado Laurel carr3in6 a $tic8, and ?1$t at that 2o2ent -ri2iti0o EonFaleF and $e0eral police2en approached hi2 callin6 for

peace) hi$ a$$ailant$ then left hi2 and 4itne$$ 4ent to the nei6h5orin6 dr16 $tore 4here he recei0ed fir$t aid treat2ent. /itne$$ f1rther te$tified that he had 5een co1rtin6 the 6irl ,oncepcion #at for a 2onth) that, 5eca1$e hi$ $4eetheart had 5een 8i$$ed 53 Jo$e Laurel, he felt a little re$ent2ent a6ain$t the latter, and that $ince then he had had no opport1nit3 to $pea8 4ith hi$ a$$ailant 1ntil the $aid ni6ht of the attac8. &oC1e ,a$tillo, a 4itne$$ for the pro$ec1tion, te$tified that, at the reC1e$t of (o2in6o -an6ani5an, he had $166e$ted to hi$ 5rother, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, that the latter $ho1ld 6o do4n to the door of the 6ro1nd floor of the parochial 51ildin6, 4here Jo$e Laurel 4a$ 4aitin6 for hi2,
257

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 257 United States vs. Laurel. $o that the latter 2i6ht 2a8e e7planation$ to hi2 4ith re6ard to 4hat had ta8en place on the ni6ht prior to the 2Ath of (ece25er) that E7eC1iel, 4ho 4a$ in the hall 5e$ide -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, i22ediatel3 1pon recei0in6 the notice $ent hi2 in LaurelD$ na2e, 6ot 1p and 4ent do4n 4ith EonFaleF and the 4itne$$, tho16h the latter re2ained at the foot of the $tair$ in con0er$ation 4ith *ir6inio de *illa, 4ho2 he fo1nd there) that, after a little 4hile, 4itne$$ $a4 Jo$e Laurel, Jo$e Earcia, (o2in6o -an6ani5an, *icente Earcia, and ,onrado Laurel co2e do4n fro2 the $aid 51ildin6, and, on o5$er0in6 $o2ethin6 51l6in6 fro2 the 5ac8 of the latterD$ 4ai$t he a$8ed hi2 4hat 2ade that 51l6e, to 4hich Laurel replied that it 2eant Ipeace)I 4itne$$ there1pon $aid to hi2 that if he reall3 de$ired Ipeace,I a$ 4itne$$ al$o did, he 2i6ht deli0er to the latter the re0ol0er he 4a$ carr3in6, and to pro0e that he 4o1ld not 2a8e 5ad 1$e of the 4eapon, Laurel 2i6ht ta8e the cartrid6e$ o1t and deli0er the re0ol0er to 4itne$$. Thi$ he did, the 4itne$$ recei0ed the re0ol0er 4itho1t the cartrid6e$, and hi$ fear$ th1$ alla3ed, the 4itne$$ ret1rned to the 1pper floor to the entertain2ent) 51t that, at the end of a5o1t half an ho1r, he heard a h15515 a2on6 the people 4ho $aid that there 4a$ a C1arrel, and 4itne$$, $1$pectin6 that hi$ 5rother E7eC1iel had 2et 4ith $o2e treacher3, ran do4n o1t of the ho1$e) on. reachin6 the 6ro1nd floor he 2et -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, 4ho had 5lood $tain$ on hi$ ar2) that

EonFaleF then infor2ed hi2 that E7eC1iel 4a$ 5adl3 4o1nded) that he fo1nd hi$ $aid 5rother in "r$enio EonFaleFD dr16 $tore) and that hi$ 5rother 4a$ no lon6er a5le to $pea8 51t 2ade 8no4n that he 4anted to 5e $hri0en. /itne$$ added that on that $a2e ni6ht he deli0ered the re0ol0er to hi$ father, !i7to ,a$tillo, 4ho corro5orated thi$ $tate2ent. The other 4itne$$, -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, corro5orated the te$ti2on3 6i0en 53 the precedin6 4itne$$, &oC1e ,a$tillo, and te$tified that, 4hile he 4a$ that ni6ht attendin6 the entertain2ent at the parochial 51ildin6 of Tana1an, in co29 25> -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

258

United States vs. Laurel. pan3 4ith E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, the latter recei0ed notice fro2 hi$ G,a$tilloD$H 5rother, thro16h (o2in6o -an6ani5an, to the effect that Jo$e Laurel de$ired to $pea8 4ith hi2 concernin6 4hat occ1rred on the ni6ht of (ece25er 2A) that there1pon E7eC1iel, the latterD$ 5rother, &oC1e and 4itne$$ all 4ent do4n o1t of the ho1$e, tho16h &oC1e $topped on the 2ain $tair4a3 4hile 4itne$$ and E7eC1iel 4ent on 1ntil the3 ca2e to the 2ain door of the 6ro1nd floor 4here the3 2et "lfon$o Torre$ and Ea1dencio Earcia) that, after a 4hile, Jo$e Laurel, ,onrado Laurel, *icente Earcia, Jo$e Earcia "C1ino, and (o2in6o -an6ani5an ca2e 1p) that 4hen Jo$e Laurel 2et E7eC1iel ,a$tillo he ca16ht the latter 53 the hand and the t4o $eparated the2$el0e$ fro2 the re$t and retired to a certain di$tance, altho16h *icente and Jo$e Earcia, ,onrado Laurel, and "lfon$o Torre$ placed the2$el0e$ the neare$t to the fir$t t4o, Jo$e Laurel and E7eC1iel ,a$tillo) that at thi$ ?1nct1re 4itne$$, 4ho 4a$ a5o1t A or 7 2eter$ a4a3 fro2 the t4o 2en la$t na2ed, o5$er0ed that Jo$e Laurel, 4ho had had hi$ hand in hi$ poc8et 4hile he 4a$ tal8in6 4ith E7eC1iel, i22ediatel3 dre4 o1t a hand8erchief and there4ith $tr1c8 E7eC1iel a 5lo4 on the 5rea$t) that the latter forth4ith hit hi$ a$$ailant, Laurel, 4ith a cane 4hich he 4a$ carr3in6) that Laurel, 1pon recei0in6 the 5lo4, $tepped 5ac8, 4hile E7eC1iel p1r$1ed hi2 and contin1ed to $tri8e hi2) that there1pon *icente Earcia $ta55ed E7eC1iel, 4ho had hi$ 5ac8 t1rned to4ard hi2, and ,onrado Laurel $tr1c8 the $aid E7eC1iel a 5lo4 on the head 4ith a cane) that 4hen 4itne$$

approached the $pot 4here the fi6ht 4a$ 6oin6 on, $e0eral police2en appeared there and called o1t for peace) and that he did not notice 4hat Jo$e Earcia "C1ino and "lfon$o Torre$ did. #1cio *illa, a police2an, te$tified that on hearin6 the co22otion, he 4ent to the $cene of it and 2et Jo$e Laurel 4ho 4a$ co2in6 a4a3, 4al8in6 at an ordinar3 6ait and carr3in6 a 5lood3 poc8et8nife in hi$ hand) that 4itne$$ therefore arre$ted hi2, too8 the 4eapon fro2 hi2 and cond1cted hi2 to the 21nicipal 51ildin6) and that the

259

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 259 United States vs. Laurel. $er6eant and another police2an, the latter 5ein6 the 4itne$$D$ co2panion, too8 char6e of the other di$t1r5er$. The defendant, Jo$e Laurel, te$tified that earl3 in the e0enin6 of the 2>th of (ece25er he 4ent to the parochial 51ildin6, in co2pan3 4ith (io$dado !ian$ance and $e0eral 3o1n6 people, a2on6 the2 hi$ co1$in <altaFara &oca2ora, for the p1rpo$e of attendin6 an entertain2ent 4hich 4a$ to 5e held there) that, 4hile $ittin6 in the. front ro4 of chair$, for there 4ere a$ 3et 51t fe4 people, and 4hile the director of the colle6e 4a$ deli0erin6 a di$co1r$e, he 4a$ approached 53 (o2in6o -an6ani5an 4ho told hi2 that E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4i$hed to $pea8 4ith hi2, to 4hich 4itne$$ replied that he $ho1ld 4ait a 4hile and -an6ani5an there1pon 4ent a4a3) that, a $hort ti2e after4ard$, he 4a$ al$o approached 53 "lfredo =atco 4ho 6a0e hi2 a $i2ilar 2e$$a6e, and $oon after4ard$ %elipe "l2eda ca2e 1p and told hi2 that E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4a$ 4aitin6 f or hi2 on the 6ro1nd floor of the ho1$e) thi$ 5ein6 the third $122on$ addre$$ed to hi2, he aro$e and 4ent do4n to a$certain 4hat the $aid E7eC1iel 4anted) that, 4hen he $tepped o1t$ide of the $treet door, he $a4 $e0eral per$on$ there, a2on6 the2, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo) the latter, 1pon $eein6 4itne$$, $166e$ted that the3 $eparate fro2 the re$t and tal8 in a place a $hort di$tance a4a3) that there1pon E7eC1iel a$8ed 4itne$$ 4h3 he had 8i$$ed hi$, E7eC1ielD$ $4eetheart, and on LaurelD$ repl3in6 that he had done $o 5eca1$e $he 4a$ 0er3 fic8le and prodi6al of her 1$e of the 4ord I3e$I on all occa$ion$, E7eC1iel $aid to hi2 that he o16ht not to act that 4a3 and i22ediatel3 $tr1c8 hi2 a 5lo4 on the head 4ith a cane or cl15, 4hich a$$a1lt 2ade 4itne$$ diFF3 and

ca1$ed hi2 to fall to the 6ro1nd in a $ittin6 po$t1re) that, a$ 4itne$$ feared that hi$ a66re$$or 4o1ld contin1e to a$$a1lt hi2, he too8 hold of the poc8et8nife 4hich he 4a$ carr3in6 in hi$ poc8et and there4ith defended hi2$elf) that he did not 8no4 4hether he 4o1nded E7eC1iel 4ith the $aid 4eapon, for, 4hen 4itne$$ aro$e, he noticed that he, the latter, had a 4o1nd in the ri6ht parietal re6ion and a cont1$ion in the left) that 4itne$$ 4a$ there1pon 2A0 -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

260

United States vs. Laurel. arre$ted 53 the police2an, #1cio *illa, and 4a$ 1na5le to $tate 4hether he dropped the poc8et8nife he carried or 4hether it 4a$ pic8ed 1p 53 the $aid officer) that it too8 2ore than a 4ee8 to c1re hi$ in?1rie$) that he had 5een co1rtin6 the 6irl ,oncepcion #at for a 3ear, 51t that in cto5er, 1909, hi$ co1rt$hip ended and E7eC1iel ,a$tillo then 5e6an to co1rt her) and that, a$ 4itne$$ 5elie0ed that the $aid 6irl 4o1ld not 2arr3 hi2, nor E7eC1iel, he 8i$$ed her in the $treet, on the ni6ht of (ece25er 2A, 1909, and i22ediatel3 thereafter ran to4ard hi$ ho1$e. <altaFara &oca2ora $tated that, 4hile $he 4a$ 4ith Jo$e Laurel on the ni6ht of (ece25er 2>, 1909, attendin6 an entertain2ent in the parochial 51ildin6 of Tana1an, the latter 4a$ $1cce$$i0el3 called 53 (o2in6o -an6ani5an, "lfredo =atco, and %elipe "l2eda, the la$t na2ed $a3in6@ IEo alon6, old fello4) 3o1 are friend$ no4.I ,a$i2iro Tapia te$tified that, on the 2ornin6 follo4in6 the alle6ed cri2e, he 0i$ited Jo$e Laurel in the ?ail, and fo1nd hi2 $1fferin6 fro2 t4o 5r1i$e$ or cont1$ion$) that to c1re the2, he 6a0e hi2 one application of tinct1re of arnica to appl3 to hi$ in?1rie$, 4hich 4ere not $erio1$. <enito *alencia al$o te$tified that, 4hile at the entertain2ent, he $a4 (o2in6o -an6ani5an approach Jo$e Laurel and tell hi2 that E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4a$ 4aitin6 for hi2 do4n$tair$ to tal8 to hi2) that Laurel ref1$ed to 6o, a$ he 4i$hed to 5e pre$ent at the entertain2ent, and that -an6ani5an then 4ent a4a3) that, $oon after4ard$, 4itne$$ al$o 4ent do4n, intendin6 to ret1rn ho2e, and, 4hen he had 5een on the 6ro1nd floor of the parochial 51ildin6 for fifteen 2in1te$, he $a4, a2on6 the 2an3 people 4ho 4ere there, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo and Jo$e

Laurel 4ho 4ere tal8in6 apart fro2 a 6ro1p of per$on$ a2on6 4ho2 he reco6niFed &oC1e ,a$tillo, -ri2iti0o EonFaleF and ,onrado Laurel) that $oon after thi$, 4itne$$ $a4 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo $tri8e Jo$e Laurel a 5lo4 4ith a cane and the latter $ta66er and $tart to r1n, p1r$1ed 53 the for2er, the a66re$$or) that at thi$ ?1nct1re, ,onrado Laurel approached E7eC1iel and, in t1rn, $tr1c8 hi2 fro2 5ehind) and that the police

261

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 2A1 United States vs. Laurel. pre$entl3 inter0ened in the fi6ht, and 4itne$$ left the place 4here it occ1rred. The defendant (o2in6o -an6ani5an te$tified that, 4hile he 4a$ at the entertain2ent that ni6ht, he noticed that it threatened to rain, and therefore left the ho1$e to 6et hi$ hor$e, 4hich he had left tied to a po$t near the door) that, on reachin6 the 6ro1nd floor, the 5rother$ &oC1e and E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, a$8ed hi2 to do the2 the fa0or to call Jo$e Laurel, 5eca1$e the3 4i$hed to tal8 to the latter, 4itne$$ noticin6 that the $aid 5rother$ 4ere then pro0ided 4ith cane$) that he called Jo$e Laurel, 51t the latter $aid that he did not 4i$h to 6o do4n, 5eca1$e he 4a$ li$tenin6 to the di$co1r$e 4hich 4a$ then 5ein6 deli0ered, and 4itne$$ therefore 4ent do4n to report the an$4er to the $aid 5rother$) that 4hile he 4a$ at the door of the parochial 51ildin6 4aitin6 for the driFFle to cea$e, Jo$e Laurel and %elipe "l2eda ca2e 1p to 4here he 4a$, and ?1$t then E7eC1iel ,a$tillo approached the for2er, Laurel, and the3 5oth dre4 a$ide, a5o1t 2 ra!as a4a3, to tal8) that $oon after4ard$, 4itne$$ $a4 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo deal Jo$e Laurel t4o 5lo4$ in $1cce$$ion and the latter $ta66er and $tart to r1n, p1r$1ed 53 hi$ a$$ailant) the latter 4a$ 2et 53 $e0eral per$on$ 4ho cro4ded a5o1t in an ai2le$$ 2anner, a2on6 4ho2 4itne$$ reco6niFed &oC1e ,a$tillo and ,onrado Laurel) and that he did not $ee -ri2iti0o EonFaleF nor Ea1dencio Earcia at the place 4here the fi6ht occ1rred, altho16h he re2ained 4here he 4a$ 1ntil a police2an 4a$ called. ,onrado Laurel, a co1$in of Jo$e Laurel, te$tified that, on the ni6ht ,of (ece25er 2>, 1909, he 4a$ in the parochial 51ildin6 for the p1rpo$e of attendin6 the entertain2ent) that he 4a$ then carr3in6 a

re0ol0er, 4hich had neither cartrid6e$ nor firin6 pin, for the p1rpo$e of ret1rnin6 it to it$ o4ner, 4ho 4a$ a ,on$ta51lar3 tele6raph operator on d1t3 in the p1e5lo of Tana1an) that the latter, ha0in6 5een infor2ed 53 a 61n$2ith that the $aid re0ol0er co1ld not 5e fi7ed, reC1e$ted 4itne$$, 4hen the3 2et each other in the.coc8pit the pre0io1$ afternoon, to ret1rn the 4eapon 2A2 -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

262

United States vs. Laurel. to hi2 d1rin6 the entertain2ent) that, on lea0in6 the $aid 51ildin6 to retire to hi$ ho1$e and chan6e hi$ clothe$, he 2et &oC1e ,a$tillo, hi$ co1$in and confidential friend, on the 6ro1nd floor of the parochial 51ildin6 or con0ent and the latter, $eein6 that 4itne$$ 4a$ carr3in6 a re0ol0er, in$i$ted on 5orro4in6 it, not4ith$tandin6 that 4itne$$ told hi2 that it 4a$ 1n$er0icea5le) that, after he had chan6ed hi$ clothe$, he left hi$ ho1$e to ret1rn to the parochial 51ildin6, and near the 2ain door of $aid 51ildin6 he fo1nd E7eC1iel ,a$tillo and Jo$e Laurel tal8in6 53 the2$el0e$) that a fe4 2o2ent$ after4ard$, he $a4 E7eC1iel $tri8e Jo$e t4o 5lo4$ 4ith a cane that nearl3 ca1$ed hi2 to fall at f1ll len6th on the 6ro1nd, and that Jo$e i22ediatel3 6ot 1p and $tarted to r1n, p1r$1ed 53 hi$ a$$ailant, E7eC1iel) that 4itne$$, on $eein6 thi$, 6a0e the latter in t1rn a 5lo4 on the head 4ith a cane, to $top hi2 fro2 p1r$1in6 Jo$e, 4itne$$ fearin6 that the p1r$1er, $ho1ld he o0erta8e the p1r$1ed, 4o1ld 8ill hi2) that, after 4itne$$ $tr1c8 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4ith the cane, the police inter0ened and arre$ted the2) and that, a2on6 tho$e arre$ted, he $a4 -an6ani5an and *icente Earcia, and, at the place of the di$t1r5ance, &oC1e ,a$tillo and -ri2iti0o EonFaleF. *icente Earcia denied ha0in6 ta8en part in the fi6ht. He te$tified that he al$o 4a$ attendin6 the entertain2ent and, feelin6 4ar2, 4ent do4n o1t of the parochial 51ildin6) that, 1pon $o doin6, he $a4 (o2in6o -an6ani5an and Jo$e Laurel, 51t 4a$ not pre$ent at the fi6ht, and onl3 o5$er0ed, on lea0in6 the 51ildin6, that there 4a$ a co22otion) then he heard that a police2an had arre$ted Jo$e Laurel. /ell94ritten 5rief$ 4ere filed in fir$t in$tance, 5oth 53 the pro$ec1tion and 53 the defen$e) 51t, not4ith$tandin6 the lar6e n125er

of per$on$ 4ho 21$t ha0e 5een e3e4itne$$e$ to 4hat occ1rred, it i$ certain that the pro$ec1tion 4a$ onl3 a5le to pre$ent the 4itne$$, -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, a relati0e of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, to te$tif3 a$ to ho4 and 53 4ho2 the a$$a1lt 4a$ 5e61n. Each one of the co25atant$, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo and Jo$e

263

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 2A3 United States vs. Laurel. Laurel, acc1$ed the other of ha0in6 co22enced the a$$a1lt. ,a$tillo te$tified that Laurel, after the e7chan6e of a fe4 4ord$ 5et4een the2, $1ddenl3 and 4itho1t 4arnin6 $ta55ed hi2 4ith a 8nife, 4hile Laurel $4ore that, after a $hort con0er$ation ,a$tillo $tr1c8 hi2 t4o 5lo4$ 4ith a cane, on 4hich acco1nt, in order to defend hi2$elf, he $eiFed a poc8et8nife he carried in hi$ poc8et. +n 0ie4, therefore, of the$e 2anife$t contradiction$, and in order to deter2ine the lia5ilit3 of the defendant, Jo$e Laurel, 4ho, it.i$ pro0ed, inflicted the $erio1$ 4o1nd on E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, it i$ nece$$ar3 to decide 4hich of the t4o 4a$ the a$$ailant. Ta8in6 for 6ranted that Jo$e Laurel did act1all3 8i$$ ,oncepcion #at in the $treet and in the pre$ence of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, the 6irlD$ $1itor, and of other$ 4ho 4ere acco2pan3in6 her, the fir$t C1er3 that nat1rall3 ari$e$ in the e7a2ination of the e0idence and the circ12$tance$ connected 4ith the occ1rrence, i$@ /ho pro0o8ed the enco1nter 5et4een Laurel and ,a$tillo, and the inter0ie4 5et4een the $a2e, and 4ho in0ited the other, on the ni6ht of (ece25er 2>, 1909, to co2e do4n fro2 the parochial 51ildin6 of Tana1an, to the lo4er floor and o1t$ide the entrance of the $a2eJ E0en on thi$ concrete point the e0idence i$ contradictor3, for, 4hile the 4itne$$e$ of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo $4ore that the latter 4a$ in0ited 53 Jo$e Laurel, tho$e of the latter te$tified, in t1rn, that Laurel 4a$ in0ited three con$ec1ti0e ti2e$ 53 three different 2e$$en6er$ in the na2e and on the part of the $aid ,a$tillo. +n the pre$ence of thi$ 2ar8ed contradiction, and 5ein6 co2pelled to inC1ire into the tr1th of the 2atter, 4e are forced to thin8 that the per$on 4ho 4o1ld con$ider hi2$elf a66rie0ed at the 8i$$ 6i0en the 6irl ,oncepcion #at, in the $treet and in the pre$ence of $e0eral 4itne$$e$, 4o1ld 1ndo15tedl3 5e E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, the $1itor of the

6irl, and it 4o1ld appear to 5e a rea$ona5le concl1$ion that he hi2$elf, hi6hl3 offended at the 5oldne$$ of Jo$e Laurel, 4a$ the per$on 4ho 4i$hed to de2and e7planation of the offen$e. 'pon thi$ pre2i$e, and ha0in6 4ei6hed and con$idered a$ a 4hole the te$ti2on3, circ12$tantial e0idence, and 2A: -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

264

United States vs. Laurel. other 2erit$ of the pre$ent ca$e, the con0iction i$ acC1ired, 53 the force of pro5a5ilit3, that the in0itation, 6i0en thro16h the 2edi12 of $e0eral indi0id1al$, ca2e fro2 the 2an 4ho 4a$ offended 53 the incident of the 8i$$, and that it 4a$ the perpetrator of the offen$e 4ho 4a$ in0ited to co2e do4n fro2 the parochial 51ildin6 to the 6ro1nd floor thereof to 2a8e e7planation$ re6ardin6 the in$1lt to the 6irl #at, the real $1itor of 4ho2 4a$ at the ti2e the $aid E7eC1iel ,a$tillo. "ll thi$ i$ not 2ere con?ect1re) it i$ lo6icall3 deri0ed fro2 the a5o0e related fact$. <oth Jo$e and E7eC1iel 4ere attendin6 the entertain2ent that ni6ht in the 1pper $tor3 of the parochial 51ildin6. E7eC1iel 4a$ the fir$t 4ho 4ent 5elo4, 4ith hi$ co1$in, -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, 8no4in6 that Laurel re2ained in the hall a5o0e, and he it 4a$ 4ho 4aited for nearl3 half an ho1r on the 6ro1nd floor of the $aid 51ildin6 for the $aid Jo$e Laurel to co2e do4n. The latter 4a$ notified three ti2e$, and $1cce$$i0el3, in the na2e and on the part of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, fir$t 53 (o2in6o -an6ani5an, then 53 "lfredo =atco and finall3 53 %elipe "l2eda.three $122on$e$ 4hich 4ere nece$$ar3 5efore Jo$e Laurel co1ld 5e ind1ced, after the lap$e of nearl3 half an ho1r, to co2e do4n. Mean4hile, for that $pace of ti2e, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4a$ a4aitin6 hi2, 1ndo15tedl3 for the p1rpo$e of de2andin6 e7planation$ concernin6 the offen$i0e act co22itted a6ain$t hi$ $4eetheart. The nat1ral co1r$e and the ri6oro1$ lo6ic of the fact$ can not ar5itraril3 5e re?ected, 1nle$$ it 5e $ho4n that other entirel3 ano2alo1$ fact$ occ1rred. +f, in the nat1ral order of thin6$, the per$on 4ho 4a$ deepl3 offended 53 the in$1lt 4a$ the one 4ho 5elie0ed he had a ri6ht to de2and e7planation$ of the perpetrator of that in$1lt, it i$ C1ite

pro5a5le that the a66rie0ed part3 4a$ the one 4ho, thro16h the in$tr12entalit3 of $e0eral per$on$, in0ited the in$1lter to co2e do4n fro2 the 1pper $tor3 of the parochial 51ildin6, 4here he 4a$, and 2a8e the e7planation$ 4hich he 5elie0ed he had a ri6ht to e7act) and if thi$ 5e $o, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, $erio1$l3 af9

265

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 2A5 United States vs. Laurel. fected and offended 53 the in$1lt to hi$ $4eetheart, ,oncepcion #at, 21$t 5e held to 5e the one 4ho 5ro16ht a5o1t the enco1nter, 6a0e the in0itation and pro0o8ed the .occ1rrence, a$ $ho4n 53 hi$ cond1ct in i22ediatel3 6oin6 do4n to the entrance door of the $aid 51ildin6 and in re$i6nedl3 4aitin6, for half an ho1r, for Jo$e Laurel to co2e do4n. Moreo0er, if the latter had pro0o8ed the enco1nter or inter0ie4 had on the 6ro1nd floor of the 51ildin6, it i$ not 1nder$tood 4h3 he dela3ed in 6oin6 do4n, nor 4h3 it 5eca2e nece$$ar3 to call hi2 three ti2e$, in $1ch 2anner that E7eC1iel ,a$tillo had to 4ait for hi2 5elo4 for half an ho1r, 4hen it i$ nat1ral and lo6ical to $1ppo$e that the pro0o8in6 part3 or the one intere$ted in recei0in6 e7planation$ 4o1ld 5e preci$el3 the one 4ho 4o1ld ha0e ha$tened to 5e in 4aitin6 at the place of the appoint2ent) he 4o1ld not ha0e 5een $lo4 or indi$po$ed to 6o do4n, a$ 4a$ the ca$e 4ith Jo$e Laurel. +f, a$ i$ tr1e, the latter 4a$ the one 4ho in$1lted the 6irl ,oncepcion #at.an in$1lt 4hich 21$t deepl3 ha0e affected the 2ind of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, the 6irlD$ $1itor at the ti2e.it i$ not po$$i5le to concei0e, a$ clai2ed 53 the pro$ec1tion, ho4 and 4h3 it $ho1ld 5e Jo$e Laurel 4ho $ho1ld $ee8 e7planation$ fro2 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo. +t 4a$ nat1ral and 21ch 2ore li8el3 that it $ho1ld ha0e 5een the latter 4ho had an intere$t in de2andin6 e7planation$ fro2 the 2an 4ho in$1lted hi$ $4eetheart. +n 0ie4 of the 5eha0ior of the 2en a fe4 2o2ent$ 5efore the occ1rrence, 4e are of the opinion that ,a$tillo 4a$ the fir$t to 6o do4n to the entrance door of the parochial 51ildin6, 8no4in6 that Jo$e Laurel 4a$ in the hall, and, not4ith$tandin6 the $tate of hi$ 2ind, he had the patience to 4ait f or the $aid Laurel 4ho, it appear$, 4a$ 0er3 rel1ctant to 6o do4n and it 4a$ nece$$ar3 to call hi2 three ti2e$ 5efore he finall3 did $o, at the end of half an ho1r.

"fter con$iderin6 the$e occ1rrence$ 4hich too8 place 5efore the cri2e, the C1er3 of co1r$e ari$e$ a$ to 4hich of the t4o 4a$ the fir$t to a$$a1lt the other, for each la3$ the 2AA -H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

266

United States vs. Laurel. 5la2e 1pon hi$ opponent for the co22ence2ent of the a$$a1lt. E7eC1iel ,a$tillo te$tified that after he had replied to Jo$e Laurel that he, the 4itne$$, 4a$ not o5li6ed to $a3 4hether he had in hi$ po$$e$$ion $e0eral letter$ addre$$ed 53 Laurel to the 6irl ,oncepcion #at, Laurel i22ediatel3 $ta55ed hi2 in the 5rea$t 4ith a 8nife) 4hile Jo$e Laurel $4ore that, 1pon hi$ an$4erin6 the C1e$tion p1t to hi2 53 ,a$tillo a$ to 4h3 4itne$$ had 8i$$ed hi$ $4eetheart, $a3in6 that it 4a$ 5eca1$e $he 4a$ 0er3 fic8le and prodi6al of the 4ord I3e$I on all occa$ion$, E7eC1iel $aid to hi2 in repl3 that he o16ht not to act in that 2anner, and i22ediatel3 $tr1c8 hi2 a co1ple of 5lo4$ on the head 4ith a cl15, 4herefore, in order to defend hi2$elf, he dre4 the 8nife he 4a$ carr3in6 in hi$ poc8et. /ere the $tate2ent$ 2ade 53 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo $ati$factoril3 pro0en at the trial, it i$ 1nC1e$tiona5le that Jo$e Laurel 4o1ld 5e lia5le a$ the a1thor of the p1ni$ha5le act 1nder pro$ec1tion) 51t, in 0ie4 of the antecedent$ af orerelated, the concl1$ion$ reached fro2 the e0idence, and the other 2erit$ of the ca$e, the concl1$ion i$ certain that the a$$a1lt 4a$ co22enced 53 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, 4ho $tr1c8 Jo$e Laurel t4o 5lo4$ 4ith a cane, $li6htl3 in?1rin6 hi2 in t4o place$ on the head, and the a$$a1lted 2an, in $elfdefen$e, 4o1nded hi$ a$$ailant 4ith a poc8et8nife) therefore, Jo$e Laurel co22itted no cri2e and i$ e7e2pt fro2 all re$pon$i5ilit3, a$ the infliction of the 4o1nd$ 4a$ attended 53 the three reC1i$ite$ $pecified in para6raph :, article > of the -enal ,ode. %ro2 the e0idence, then, prod1ced at the trial, it i$ concl1ded that it 4a$ E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 4ho, thro16h the 2ediation of $e0eral other$, in0ited Laurel to co2e do4n fro2 the 1pper $tor3 of the parochial 51ildin6, and that it 4a$ he, therefore, 4ho pro0o8ed the affra3 afore2entioned, and, al$o, it 4a$ he 4ho 1nla4f1ll3 a$$a1lted Jo$e Laurel, 53 $tri8in6 the latter t4o 5lo4$ 4ith a cane ina$21ch a$ it i$

not li8el3 that after ha0in6 recei0ed a dan6ero1$ 4o1nd in the left 5rea$t, he 4o1ld ha0e 5een a5le to $tri8e hi$ alle6ed a$$ailant t4o $1cce$$i0e 5lo4$ and 21ch

267

* #. 22, M"&,H 15, 1912. 2A7 United States vs. Laurel. le$$ p1r$1e hi2. +t i$ 0er3 pro5a5le that he recei0ed the $aid 4o1nd$ after he had a$$a1lted Jo$e Laurel 4ith the cane, and Laurel, on hi$ part, in defendin6 hi2$elf fro2 the a$$a1lt, e2plo3ed rational 2ean$ 53 1$in6 the 8nife that he carried in hi$ poc8et. %or all the fore6oin6 rea$on$, Jo$e Laurel 21$t 5e acC1itted and held to 5e e7e2pt fro2 re$pon$i5ilit3 on the 6ro1nd of $elf9defen$e. The ca$e fall$ 4ithin para6raph : of article > of the -enal ,ode, ina$21ch a$ the defen$i0e act e7ec1ted 53 hi2 4a$ attended 53 the three reC1i$ite$ of ille6al a66re$$ion on the part of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, there 5ein6 a lac8 of $1fficient pro0ocation on the part of Laurel, 4ho, a$ 4e ha0e $aid, did not pro0o8e the occ1rrence co2plained of, nor did he direct that E7eC1iel ,a$tillo 5e in0ited to co2e do4n fro2 the parochial 51ildin6 and arran6e the inter0ie4 in 4hich ,a$tillo alone 4a$ intere$ted, and, finall3, 5eca1$e Laurel, in defendin6 hi2$elf 4ith a poc8et8nife a6ain$t the a$$a1lt 2ade 1pon hi2 4ith a cane, 4hich 2a3 al$o 5e a deadl3 4eapon, e2plo3ed rea$ona5le 2ean$ to pre0ent or repel the $a2e. 'nder the fore6oin6 rea$onin6, the other acc1$ed, ,onrado Laurel and *icente Earcia 4ho, li8e4i$e, 4ere con0icted a$ principal$ of the cri2e 1nder pro$ec1tion, are co2pri$ed 4ithin the pro0i$ion$ of para6raph 5 of the $aid article > of the -enal ,ode, 4hich are a$ follo4$@
IHe 4ho act$ in defen$e of the per$on or ri6ht$ of hi$ $po1$e, a$cendant$, de$cendant$, or le6iti2ate, nat1ral, or adopted 5rother$ or $i$ter$, or of hi$ relati0e$ 53 affinit3 in the $a2e de6ree$ and tho$e 53 con$an61init3 4ithin the fo1rth ci0il de6ree, pro0ided the fir$t and $econd circ12$tance$ 2entioned in the fore6oin6 n125er are attendant, and pro0ided that in ca$e the part3 attac8ed fir$t 6a0e pro0ocation, the defender too8 no part therein.I

,onrado Laurel and *icente Earcia, fir$t co1$in$ of Jo$e Laurel, a$ $ho4n in the trial record to ha0e 5een pro0en 4itho1t contradiction 4hat$oe0er, did not pro0o8e the tro15le, nor did the3 ta8e an3 part in the in0itation e7tended to Jo$e Laurel in the na2e of and for E7eC1iel

268

2A>

-H+#+--+NE &E- &T! "NN T"TE(

United States vs. Laurel. ,a$tillo) in a$$i$tin6 in the fi6ht 5et4een ,a$tillo and Laurel, the3 acted in defen$e of their co1$in, Jo$e Laurel, 4hen the3 $a4 that the latter 4a$ a$$a1lted, t4ice $tr1c8 and e0en p1r$1ed 53 the a$$ailant, ,a$tillo) con$eC1entl3 ,onrado Laurel and *icente Earcia ha0e not tran$6re$$ed the la4 and the3 are e7e2pt fro2 all re$pon$i5ilit3, for all the reC1i$ite$ of para6raph : of the aforecited article attended the act$ perfor2ed 53 the2, a$ there 4a$ ille6al a66re$$ion on the part of the 4o1nded 2an, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, rea$ona5le nece$$it3 of the 2ean$ e2plo3ed to pre0ent or repel the $aid a66re$$ion on the part of the afore2entioned ,onrado Laurel and *icente Earcia, 4ho acted in def en$e of their co1$in, Jo$e Laurel, ille6all3 a$$a1lted 53 E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, neither of the $aid codefendant$ ha0in6 pro0o8ed the alle6ed cri2e. /ith re6ard to (o2in6o -an6ani5an, the onl3 act of 4hich he 4a$ acc1$ed 53 the 4o1nded 2an, E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, 4a$ that he $tr1c8 the latter a 5lo4 on the left $ide 4ith hi$ fi$t, 4hile ,a$tillo 4a$ p1r$1in6 Laurel. (o2in6o -an6ani5an denied that he too8 part in the C1arrel and $tated that he 8ept at a di$tance fro2 the co25atant$, 1ntil he 4a$ arre$ted 53 a police2an. Hi$ te$ti2on3 appear$ to 5e corro5orated 53 that of -ri2iti0o EonFaleF, a 4itne$$ for the pro$ec1tion and relati0e of E7eC1iel ,a$tillo, for EonFaleF po$iti0el3 declared that -an6ani5an 4a$ 5e$ide hi2 d1rin6 the occ1rrence of the fi6ht and 4hen the other$ $1rro1nded the $aid E7eC1iel ,a$tillo) it i$, therefore, neither pro5a5le nor po$$i5le that -an6ani5an en6a6ed in the affra3, and $o he contracted no re$pon$i5ilit3 4hate0er. E7eC1iel ,a$tilloD$ 4o1nd$ 4ere 0er3 $erio1$, 51t, in 0ie4 of the fact that concl1$i0e proof 4a$ add1ced at the trial, of the attendance of the reC1i$ite$ pre$cri5ed in No$. : and 5 of article > of the -enal ,ode, in fa0or of tho$e 4ho inflicted the $aid 4o1nd$, it i$ proper to appl3 to thi$ ca$e the pro0i$ion contained in the ne7t to the la$t para6raph of r1le 51 of the pro0i$ional la4 for the application of the $aid code.

269

* #. 22, M"&,H 1A, 1912. 2A9 United States vs. "i#ueroa. /ith re$pect to the cla$$ification of the cri2e 4e 5elie0e that there i$ no need for 1$ to concern o1r$el0e$ there4ith in thi$ deci$ion, in 0ie4 of the findin6$ of fact and of la4 2ade 53 the co1rt 5elo4 1pon the C1e$tion of the lia5ilit3 of the defendant$. <3 rea$on, therefore, of all the fore6oin6, 4e are of opinion that, 4ith a re0er$al of the ?1d62ent appealed fro2, 4e $ho1ld acC1it, a$ 4e do here53, the defendant$ Jo$e Laurel, *icente Earcia, ,onrado Laurel, and (o2in6o -an6ani5an. The3 ha0e co22itted no cri2e, and 4e e7e2pt the2 fro2 all re$pon$i5ilit3. The co$t$ of 5oth in$tance$ $hall 5e de o$i%io, and the 5ond 6i0en in 5ehalf of the def endant$ $hall i22ediatel3 5e canceled. Jo&nson, 'arson, (oreland, and )rent, JJ., conc1r. Jud#ment reversed* de$endants a%+uitted. KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
Copyright 2012 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved