ALCORAN - US v. Exaltacion

Bold Italic - Statues, Rules, Cases; Bold Underline - Topic emphasized; [Green ink – see notes for further
info]; Blue ink

- case and facts; Red ink - definitions, terms; (TOPIC) - FOCUS ON THESE
Subject: Criminal Law 1 Topic: Exempting Circumstances - Duress Digest Maker: Leynard Alcoran

Case Name: US v. Exaltacion
G.R No. G.R. No. 1481 Date: February 17, 1903 Ponente: Torres, J
Topic: Exempting Circumstances - Duress
Doctrine:
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability. — the following are exempt from criminal liability:
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
Super Summary:
Defendants are charged with rebellion. Defendants are assailing that they signed the damning document under a state of
duress.
RELEVANT FACTS:
● March 26, 1903, the provincial fiscal of Bulacan presented to the court of that province an information
charging Liberato Exaltacion and Buenaventura Tanchinco with the crime of rebellion, in that they,
subsequently to the 4th day of November, 1901, willfully and illegally bound themselves to take part in the
rebellion against the Government of the United States in these Islands, swearing allegiance to the Katipunan
Society, the purpose of which was to overthrow the said Government by force of arms, this against the statute
in the case made and provided.
● In the course of the trial Don Pablo Tecson, the provincial governor of Bulacan, testified under oath that the
two defendants were arrested in the month of March, 1903, the police some days before having captured a
number of documents in the encampment of one Contreras, a so-called general of bandits, situated at a place
called Langca, of the town of Meycauayan, among which documents appeared the papers now in pages 2 and
3 of the record, signed by the said Exaltacion and Tanchinco, who recognized the said documents when they
were exhibited to them; that the said defendants stated to the witness that they had signed the documents
under compulsion; that the purpose of the Katipunan Society was to obtain the independence of the
Philippines; that this statement was made in the house of the parish priest of Meycauayan in the presence of
Exequiel Casa and Fernando Nieto. The latter, upon their examination as witnesses, testified to the same facts
stating that the defendants told Governor Tecson that they had signed the said documents under fear of death
at the hands of the thieves by whom they had been captured. The witness Casas, the municipal president of
Meycauayan, testified that he held office as such in place of the former president, Don Tomas Testa, who was
kidnapped in the month of October, 1902.
● The said documents, the first of which was dated July 4 and the second July 17, 1902, were written in Tagalog,
and contain an oath taken in the name of God, and a covenant on the part of the subscribers to carry out the
superior orders of the Katipunan, and never disobey them until their death in the defense of the mother
country. The two accused under oath, testified to having signed the said documents and alleged that they did
not so under compulsion and force while they were held as captives by the thieves; that the defendant
Tanchinco was captured in the fields one day when he was going to work on his farm by three armed men,
unknown to him, who asked him if he was an agent or friend of President Testa, and upon his replying in the
negative they compelled him in view of his denial to sign a document, now on page 3 of the record.
● The defendant Tanchinco cited Lazaro Yusay to testify to the fact that he was captured at a place called Kaibiga
in the township of Novaliches, and that on the day following his release, having been unable to pay the $300
which was demanded of him, he reported to the president, Tomas Testa. The defendant Liberato Exaltacion
under oath testified that he was captured near Meycauayan by five persons, unknown, dressed as policemen
and armed with guns or revolvers; that these men bound him and took him into the forest and there
compelled him by threats of death to sign the document now on page 2 of the record; that thereupon they
allowed him to go upon promise to return. This defendant testified that Antero Villano and Tomas Rivera saw
him while on the road in the hands of the thieves. Both the accused testified that as soon as they were
released they presented themselves to the president, Don Tomas Testa, in the presence of witnesses, and
subsequently went to Bonifacio Morales, a lieutenant of volunteers, and reported to him the fact that they
had been captured.
● The witnesses Morales, Lazaro Yusay, Antero Villano, Dalmacio Ferrer, and Hipolito de Leon — of whom the
last two were present when Tanchinco appeared before Senor Testa, the president of Meycauayan, and
reported to him what had happened to him — all testified to the same fact and corroborated the statements
of the accused with respect to their capture and their subsequent report to President Testa and to the witness
Morales.
Issue #1: Whether or not duress relieves them from criminal liability of rebellion
Yes. The Court reversed the decision and acquitted the defendants because the documents were insufficient to
prove their guilt. Documents signed under compulsion (under threat of death) and while in captivity relieve the two
from all criminal liability from the crime of rebellion.
The evidence for the prosecution, and especially the two documents above referred to, signed by the accused, is not
sufficient to prove the guilt of the latter or to justify the imposition upon them f the penalty inflicted by the judgment
of the curt below.
The facts, established by the evidence, that the defendants were kidnapped by brigands who belonged to the
Contreras band, and that they signed the said documents under compulsion and while in captivity, relieve them from
all criminal liability from the crime of rebellion of which they are charged. The conduct of the defendants in presenting
themselves first to the local president of Meycauayan and subsequently to Lieut. Bonifacio Morales, of the Bulacan
Government Volunteers, as soon as they were released by the bandits is corroborative of their testimony, and is the
best demonstration of their innocence. This conclusion is not overcome by the trifling discrepancy between the
testimony of the witness Yusay and that of the defendant Tanchinco nor the fact that Exaltacion was unable to
determine the date when he was captured or that on which he appeared before President Testa.
DISPOSITION
The guilt of the defendants of the crime defined and punished by Act No. 292 not having been established at the trial
beyond a reasonable doubt, we are of the opinion that the judgment below must be reversed and the defendants
acquitted with the costs de oficio. The judge below will be informed of this decision and a copy of the judgment
entered herein will be furnished him for his information and guidance. So ordered.
Arellano, C .J ., Cooper, Willard, Mapa, McDonough and Johnson, JJ ., concur.

Opinions
Concurring:
Dissenting:
Additional Info
Additional Info 1:
Class Notes:

ALCORAN - US v. Exaltacion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALCORAN - US v. Exaltacion

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALCORAN - US v. Exaltacion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bold Italic - Statues, Rules, Cases; Bold Underline - Topic emphasized; [Green ink – see notes for further

info]; Blue ink

Topic: Exempting Circumstances - Duress

Arellano, C .J ., Cooper, Willard, Mapa, McDonough and Johnson, JJ ., concur.

You might also like