Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 175 views

    People Vs Cabale

    Uploaded by

    marvin
    1) In 1968, four men including Demetrio Cabale arrived at the store of Rufina Rosello in the Philippines. Two men entered the store and demanded money while Cabale and another man fired shots outside. 2) When Rufina refused to give them money, the men dragged her outside and strangled her to death. They also robbed a man named Ricarido Fernando. 3) The four men, including Cabale, were charged with robbery and homicide. All were found guilty except one who escaped. The court found no issues with the trial and identified procedures.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People Vs Cabale

    Uploaded by

    marvin
    175 views2 pages
    1) In 1968, four men including Demetrio Cabale arrived at the store of Rufina Rosello in the Philippines. Two men entered the store and demanded money while Cabale and another man fired shots outside. 2) When Rufina refused to give them money, the men dragged her outside and strangled her to death. They also robbed a man named Ricarido Fernando. 3) The four men, including Cabale, were charged with robbery and homicide. All were found guilty except one who escaped. The court found no issues with the trial and identified procedures.

    Original Description:

    Cabale case

    Original Title

    People vs Cabale

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) In 1968, four men including Demetrio Cabale arrived at the store of Rufina Rosello in the Philippines. Two men entered the store and demanded money while Cabale and another man fired shots outside. 2) When Rufina refused to give them money, the men dragged her outside and strangled her to death. They also robbed a man named Ricarido Fernando. 3) The four men, including Cabale, were charged with robbery and homicide. All were found guilty except one who escaped. The court found no issues with the trial and identified procedures.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    175 views2 pages

    People Vs Cabale

    Uploaded by

    marvin
    1) In 1968, four men including Demetrio Cabale arrived at the store of Rufina Rosello in the Philippines. Two men entered the store and demanded money while Cabale and another man fired shots outside. 2) When Rufina refused to give them money, the men dragged her outside and strangled her to death. They also robbed a man named Ricarido Fernando. 3) The four men, including Cabale, were charged with robbery and homicide. All were found guilty except one who escaped. The court found no issues with the trial and identified procedures.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    [ GR Nos.

    73249-50, May 08, 1990 ]


    PEOPLE v. DEMETRIO CABALE

    At about 8:00 o'clock in the evening of 7 June 1968, while Rufina Rosello, an octogenarian, was tending
    her small store located at Barrio Magaupas, Liloan, Southern Leyte, four (4) persons, later identified as
    the accused Demetrio Cabale, Florencio Daniel, Benito Terante @ "Bodoy", and Bonifacio Cualteros,
    arrived. Two (2) of them, Florencio Daniel and Benito Terante, entered the store of Rufina Rosello while
    Demetrio Cabale and Bonifacio Cualteros stayed outside and fired shots into the air, shouting: "Those
    persons who have no part get away. We are not afraid. We are the followers of Montemayor, and those
    who will get near will be killed.

    Upon entering the store, Florencio Daniel and Benito Terante demanded money from Rufina Rosello. But
    she refused to accede to their demand. So, they dragged the old woman outside the store and made her
    lie down on a bamboo bed. One of them then put his hands around her neck, strangling her, while the
    other held her upper legs and continued demanding money from her. But Rufina Rosello told them that
    she had no money.

    As this was going on, Ricarido Fernando, riding on a motorcycle, arrived at the scene. He was ordered to
    stop. When he did not stop, as he did not know the men stopping him, his motorcycle was kicked so that
    he fell. Then, a man whom he later identified as the accused Demetrio Cabale, ordered him not to rise
    but to lie flat on the ground. The man then began to search his pockets. When Ricarido Fernando placed
    his hand over the back pocket of his pants, the man struck his hand with a gun and then removed the
    money from the pocket amounting to P492.00. His wallet containing his driver's license and the certificate
    of registration of his motorcycle, as well as some coins, were also taken from him. He was then
    repeatedly kicked and "rolled" over.

    After strangling Rufina Rosello to death, Florencio Daniel and Benito Terante went back to the store.
    When they came out of it, they were carrying the "alkansiya" of Rufina Rosello. They then joined their
    companions and tried to drive off with the motorcycle of Ricarido Fernando, but they failed to start the
    motorcycle. So, Bonifacio Cualteros ordered Fernando to start the motor. After Fernando had started the
    motorcycle, the four (4) accused rode on the motorcycle and left the place.

    The cause of death was "Asphyxia, by strangulation.

    Initial investigations revealed that one of the robbers was Florencio Daniel who used to be a "cargador" of
    the Palancas. When questioned, Florencio Daniel admitted that he participated in the commission of the
    robberies and pointed to Demetrio Cabale alias Demit, Bonifacio Cualteros alias Bonie, and Benito
    Terante alias Bodoy as his companions in committing said robberies.

    Consequently, Demetrio Cabale, Bonifacio Cualteros, Florencio Daniel, and Benito Terante alias Bodoy
    were charged in two (2) separate informations before the Court of First Instance of Maasin, Southern
    Leyte, with the crimes of Robbery in Band with Less Serious Physical Injuries, docketed therein as
    Criminal Case No. R-2894, for the crime committed against Ricarido Fernando; and Robbery in Band with
    Homicide, docketed therein as Criminal Case No. R-2895, for the crime committed against Rufina
    Rosello.

    After joint trial of the two (2) cases, the accused Demetrio Cabale, Florencio Daniel, and Benito Terante
    were found guilty in both cases and sentenced, in Criminal Case No. R-2895 for the crime of Robbery
    with Homicide.`

    In view of the death penalty imposed upon each of the accused Demetrio Cabale, Florencio Daniel, and
    Benito Terante in Criminal Case No. R-2895, the records of both Criminal Cases Nos. R-2894 and R-
    2895 were forwarded to this Court pursuant to law for the review of the decision* rendered therein.
    However, upon the adoption of the 1987 Constitution under which the death penalty is no longer
    imposable, the accused, Florencio Daniel, when asked whether or not he would like to continue with the
    review of the decision as an ordinary appeal, informed the Court that he was no longer interested in
    pursuing an appeal and that he was willing to serve the reduced penalty of reclusion perpetua.[8]
    Accordingly, the judgment against him was considered final.

    Since the judgment against the accused Demetrio Cabale has also become final due to his escape from
    detention, only the appeal of the accused Benito Terante alias Bodoy is left for consideration. Earlier,
    said accused manifested his desire to continue and pursue his appeal.

    We find no merit in the appeal. On the procedural issue, we find that while the arraignment of the
    appellant was conducted after the cases had been submitted for deci-sion, the error is non-prejudicial and
    has been fully cured. In the case of People vs. Atienza, where a similar issue was raised, the Court said:

    In the instant cases, counsel for the appellant entered into trial without objecting that his client, the
    appellant herein, had not yet been arraigned. Said counsel had also the full opportunity of cross-
    examining the witnesses for the prosecution. Then, when the cases were being retried after the appellant
    had been arraigned, appellant's counsel filed a joint manifestation with the prosecution, adopting all
    proceedings had previous to the arraignment of the appellant. There was, therefore, no violation of the
    appellant's constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

    The Court cannot also give weight to the appellant's alibi. Settled is the rule that for alibi to prosper as a
    defense, the accused must prove, not only that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed,
    but also that it was impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time it was committed. In the
    instant cases, the appellant failed to prove his alibi that he was at the copra drier at Barrio Suba, Sogod,
    Southern Leyte when the robberies were committed. scene of the crimes at the time they were being
    committed.

    Besides, the alibi of the appellant cannot prevail over the testimony of Ricarido Fernando who positively
    identified the appellant as one of the four (4) persons who perpetrated the robberies on the night of 7
    June 1968. The alleged inconsistencies and improbabilities in the testimonies of the witnesses for the
    prosecution, pointed out by the appellant, refer to insignificant details which cannot destroy the credibility
    of said witnesses. Besides, they have been fully explained. Moreover, the issue involves the credibility of
    witnesses and we find no reason to set aside the findings of fact of the trial court.

    The appellant also contends that the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of
    nighttime in fixing the penalty imposed upon him in Criminal Case No. R-2894, for Robbery with Less
    Serious Physical Injuries, there being no proof that the appellant and his co-accused had purposely
    sought the cover of darkness in committing the crime. While we agree with this contention of the
    appellant, the penalty imposed is still correct since there was abuse of superior strength, without any
    mitigating circumstance to offset it.

    WHEREFORE, with the modification that the indemnity to be paid to the heirs of the deceased Rufina
    Rosello is increased to P30,000.00 (from P12,000.00), the judgment appealed from is hereby
    AFFIRMED, with proportionate costs.

    SO ORDERED.

    You might also like