Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 457 views

    GR No. 188708, July 31, 2013 People vs. Macabando Facts

    Uploaded by

    Kirstie Lou Sales
    The document summarizes a court case involving a man accused of destructive arson. The prosecution alleged that the man broke bottles, threatened to burn down his house, and later his house was seen smoking. When a neighbor approached with a fire extinguisher, the man fired shots in the air and threatened to kill anyone who put out the fire. The man claimed he was angry because an item was stolen and denied threatening to burn his house or owning a gun. The court found him guilty of arson under Presidential Decree 1613, as the fire started in his house and spread to other inhabited houses.

    Copyright:

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

    GR No. 188708, July 31, 2013 People vs. Macabando Facts

    Uploaded by

    Kirstie Lou Sales
    457 views2 pages
    The document summarizes a court case involving a man accused of destructive arson. The prosecution alleged that the man broke bottles, threatened to burn down his house, and later his house was seen smoking. When a neighbor approached with a fire extinguisher, the man fired shots in the air and threatened to kill anyone who put out the fire. The man claimed he was angry because an item was stolen and denied threatening to burn his house or owning a gun. The court found him guilty of arson under Presidential Decree 1613, as the fire started in his house and spread to other inhabited houses.

    Original Title

    CRIM2 45. People Vs. Macabando

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a court case involving a man accused of destructive arson. The prosecution alleged that the man broke bottles, threatened to burn down his house, and later his house was seen smoking. When a neighbor approached with a fire extinguisher, the man fired shots in the air and threatened to kill anyone who put out the fire. The man claimed he was angry because an item was stolen and denied threatening to burn his house or owning a gun. The court found him guilty of arson under Presidential Decree 1613, as the fire started in his house and spread to other inhabited houses.

    Copyright:

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

    GR No. 188708, July 31, 2013 People vs. Macabando Facts

    Uploaded by

    Kirstie Lou Sales
    The document summarizes a court case involving a man accused of destructive arson. The prosecution alleged that the man broke bottles, threatened to burn down his house, and later his house was seen smoking. When a neighbor approached with a fire extinguisher, the man fired shots in the air and threatened to kill anyone who put out the fire. The man claimed he was angry because an item was stolen and denied threatening to burn his house or owning a gun. The court found him guilty of arson under Presidential Decree 1613, as the fire started in his house and spread to other inhabited houses.

    Copyright:

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

    GR No.

    188708, July 31, 2013

    People Vs. Macabando

    Facts:

    Appellant broke bottles on the road holding G.I. pipe, and shouted that he wanted
    to get even. Afterwards, he uttered that he would burn his house. At 6:35 pm, Cornelio
    saw smoke coming from appellant’s house. He got a pail of water, and poured its
    contents into the fire. Eric Quilantang, a neighbor, ran to the barangay headquarters to
    get a fire extinguisher. When Eric approached the burning house, the appellant, who
    was carrying a traveling bag and a gun, told him not to interfere; the appellant then fired
    3 shots in the air. The appellant also told the people around that whoever would put out
    the fire would be killed.

    Appellant’s Defense: He admitted that he felt angry because one of his radio
    cassettes for sale had been stolen. He denied making a threat to burn his house and
    maintained that he did not own a gun. He added that the gunshots came from the
    explosion of firecrackers that he intended to use during the New Year celebration.

    The prosecution charged the appellant with the crime of destructive arson under
    Article 320 of the RPC. The RTC found him guilty. The CA affirmed.

    Issue:

    Is the accused guilty of the crime Destructive Arson?

    Ruling:

    No, the accused is not of guilty of destructive Arson.

    Article 320 contemplates the malicious burning of structures, both public and
    private, hotels, buildings, edifices, trains, vessels, aircraft, factories and other military,
    government or commercial establishments by any person or group of persons. On the
    other hand, P.D. No. 1613 contemplates the malicious burning of public and private
    structures, regardless of size, not included in Article 320 of the RPC, as amended by
    Republic Act No. 7659.. The elements of simple arson under Section 3(2) of P.D. No.
    1613 are: (a) there is intentional burning; and (b) what is intentionally burned is an
    inhabited house or dwelling. Both these elements have been proven.

    In the present case, The Information alleged that the appellant set fire to his own
    house, and that the fire spread to other inhabited houses. These allegations were
    established during trial through the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses which the
    trial and appellate courts found credible and convincing, and through the report of the
    Bureau of Fire Protection which stated that damaged houses were residential, and that
    the fire had been intentional.

    Hence, the accused can be charged of Arson under PD 1613

    You might also like