US V Valdes - Digest

The United States v Severino Valdes Y Guilgan
No. 14128, December 10, 1918
This case was instituted by Court of First Instance prosecuting attorney

charging Severino Valdes y Guilgan and Hugo Labarro y Bunaladi, alias Hugo Navarro
y Bunadia, with the crime of arson.
FACTS:
Judgment was rendered whereby Severino or Faustino Valdes y Guilgan was

sentenced to six years and one day of presidio mayor and to pay one-half of the costs,
to which defendant Guilgan appealed. Defendant Hugo Navarro’s proceedings were
dismissed.
In the morning of April 28, Mrs. Lewin was notified that her house was having
much smoke, she ordered the servant Paulino Banal to look for the fire. He found a
piece of a jute sack and a rag, soaked with kerosene oil and placed between a post of
the house and a partition of the entresol (low story between the first floor and the
second floor), which were burning.
At that moment the defendant Valdes was found in the entresol, engaged in his
work' of cleaning, while, the other defendant Hugo Labarro was cleaning the horses
kept at the place. On the same morning, the police arrested the defendants.
Severino Valdes, after his arrest, according to the Statement drawn up in the
police station, admitted before several policemen that it was he who had set the fire to
the sack and the rag, and he also had started the several other fires which had
occurred in said house on previous days; that he had performed such acts through the
inducement of the other prisoner, Hugo Labarro, for they felt resentment against, or
had had trouble with, their masters, and that, as he and his coaccused were friends,
he had acted as he did under the promise on Labarro's part to give him a peso for
each such fire that he should start.
The defendant Severino Valdes admitted, in an affidavit, that he made

declarations in the police station, although he denied having placed the rag and piece
of jute sack, soaked with kerosene, in the place where they were found, and stated
that it was the servant Paulino who had done so.
During arraignment he confessed to having set fire to a pile of dry leaves

whereby much smoke arose from the lower part of the house, but which, however, did
not forewarn his mistress, Mrs. Lewin, though she should have noticed it, and he
allowed the sack and the rag to continue burning until Mrs. Auckback, noticing a large
volume of smoke in the house, gave the alarm. No proof was submitted to substantiate
the accusation he made against the servant Paulino, who apparently is the same
person as the driver Hugo Labarro.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Valdes is guilty of consummated arson
HELD:
No, the crime is classified only as frustrated arson defendant performed all the
acts conducive to the burning of said house, but nevertheless, owing to causes
independent of his will, the criminal act which he intended was not produced.
The fact of setting fire to a jute sack and a rag soaked with kerosene oil and
placed beside an upright of the house and a partition of the entresol of the building,
thus endangering the burning of the latter, constitutes the crime of frustrated arson of
an inhabited house, on an occasion when some of its inmates were inside of it. This
crime is provided for and punished by article 549, in connection with articles 3,
paragraph 2, and 65 of the Penal Code, and the sole proven perpetrator of the same
by direct participation is the defendant Severino Valdes, for, notwithstanding his denial
and unsubstantiated exculpations, the record discloses conclusive proof that it was he
who committed the said unlawful act, as it was also, he who was guilty of having set
the other fires that occurred in said house.
The offense committed cannot be classified as consummated arson by the

burning of said inhabited house, for the reason that no part of the building had yet
commenced to burn, although, as the piece of sack and the rag, soaked in kerosene
oil, had been placed near the partition of the entresol, the partition might have started
to burn, had the fire not been put out on time.
There is no extenuating or aggravating circumstance to be considered in

connection with the commission of the crime, and therefore the penalty of presidio
mayor immediately inferior in degree to that specified in article 549 of the Penal Code,
should be imposed in its medium degree.
For the foregoing reasons the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with
the modification, however, that the penalty imposed upon the defendant shall be eight
years and one day of presidio mayor, with the accessory penalties prescribed in article
57 of the Code. The defendant shall also pay the costs of both instances.
So ordered.
Arellano, C. J., Johnson, Araullo, Street, Malcolm, and Avanceña, JJ., concur.
Judgment modified, penalty increased.

US V Valdes - Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

US V Valdes - Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

US V Valdes - Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The United States v Severino Valdes Y Guilgan

No. 14128, December 10, 1918

This case was instituted by Court of First Instance prosecuting attorney

Judgment was rendered whereby Severino or Faustino Valdes y Guilgan was

The defendant Severino Valdes admitted, in an affidavit, that he made

During arraignment he confessed to having set fire to a pile of dry leaves

Whether or not Valdes is guilty of consummated arson

The offense committed cannot be classified as consummated arson by the

There is no extenuating or aggravating circumstance to be considered in

Judgment modified, penalty increased.

You might also like