Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 170 views

    US vs-Hart-et-al-26-Phil-149-CASE-DIGEST PDF

    Uploaded by

    Vic Fronda
    The document summarizes a court case from 1913 regarding three men - Hart, Miller, and Natividad - who were accused of vagrancy. The court determined that while the men frequented gambling establishments, they each had legitimate means of earning a living through occupations such as operating a saloon and hotel (Hart), military service and business partnership (Miller), and tailoring (Natividad). As such, the court ruled that the men were earning a living through legitimate means above the average and acquitted them of the vagrancy charges.

    Copyright:

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

    US vs-Hart-et-al-26-Phil-149-CASE-DIGEST PDF

    Uploaded by

    Vic Fronda
    170 views2 pages
    The document summarizes a court case from 1913 regarding three men - Hart, Miller, and Natividad - who were accused of vagrancy. The court determined that while the men frequented gambling establishments, they each had legitimate means of earning a living through occupations such as operating a saloon and hotel (Hart), military service and business partnership (Miller), and tailoring (Natividad). As such, the court ruled that the men were earning a living through legitimate means above the average and acquitted them of the vagrancy charges.

    Original Title

    39. US vs-Hart-et-al-26-Phil-149-CASE-DIGEST-doc.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a court case from 1913 regarding three men - Hart, Miller, and Natividad - who were accused of vagrancy. The court determined that while the men frequented gambling establishments, they each had legitimate means of earning a living through occupations such as operating a saloon and hotel (Hart), military service and business partnership (Miller), and tailoring (Natividad). As such, the court ruled that the men were earning a living through legitimate means above the average and acquitted them of the vagrancy charges.

    Copyright:

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

    US vs-Hart-et-al-26-Phil-149-CASE-DIGEST PDF

    Uploaded by

    Vic Fronda
    The document summarizes a court case from 1913 regarding three men - Hart, Miller, and Natividad - who were accused of vagrancy. The court determined that while the men frequented gambling establishments, they each had legitimate means of earning a living through occupations such as operating a saloon and hotel (Hart), military service and business partnership (Miller), and tailoring (Natividad). As such, the court ruled that the men were earning a living through legitimate means above the average and acquitted them of the vagrancy charges.

    Copyright:

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

    U.S. vs Hart, et al.

    ,
    G.R. No. 8848
    November 21, 1913

    TRENT, J.:

    DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE

    This case is about vagrancy

    STATEMENT OF FACTS

    Hart, Miller and Natividad were accused of Gambling and Vagrancy


    where they all appealed.

    Hart had ran gambling games in his saloon ever night one in Angeles
    and one in the Bario of Tacondo. He also operated a hotel Angeles in which
    he did a business. He was also a proprietor He raised hogs which he sold to
    the Army garrison at Camp Stotsenberg. He was also authorized to sell
    several hundered hectarcs of land owned by one Carrillo in Tacondo. With the
    power of an attorney, he furnished the same property and paid for the 1st
    public school in Tacondo.

    Miller had the reputation of being a gambler and that he was fined for
    gambling and was seen in houses of prostitution. Miller was discharged from
    the Army last year. He had the position of Sergeant and received a rating as
    "excellent" on being discharged. He had a partnership with one Buckered
    and invested P1000. The business netted him P300 per month.

    Natividad was also a gambler. During his visits to saloons, he


    sometimes acted as a banker. His occupancy is that of a tailor which was
    sufficient enough to support his family.

    STATEMENT OF THE CASE:

    The appellants, Hart, Miller, and Natividad, were arraigned in the Court
    of First Instance of
    Pampanga on a charge of vagrancy under the provision of Act No. 519, found
    guilty, and were
    each sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. Hart and Miller were further
    sentenced to a fine
    of P200, and Natividad to a fine of P100. All appealed.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not Hart, Miller and Natividad have committed the act of
    Vagrancy.

    RULING:

    Defendants are AQUITTED

    Act No. 519 states that:

    "(1) Every person having no apparent means of subsistence, who had the
    physical ability to work, and who neglects to apply himself or herself to some
    lawful calling; (2) every person found loitering about saloons or dram shops or
    gambling housed, or tramping or straying through the country without visible
    means of support; (3) every person known to be a pickpocket, thief, burglar,
    ladrone, either by his own confession or by his having been convicted of either
    said offenses, and having no visible or lawful means of support when found
    loitering about any gambling house, cockpit, or in any outlying barrio of a
    pueblo; (4) every idle or dissolute person of associate of known thieves or
    ladrones who wanders about the country at unusual hours of the night; (5)
    every idle person who lodges in any barn, shed, outhouse, vessel, or place
    other than such as is kept for lodging purposed, without the permission of the
    owner or a person entitled to the possession thereof; (6) every lewd or
    dissolute person who lives in and about houses of ill fame; every common
    prostitute and common drunkard, is a vagrant."

    It is insisted by the Attorney General (AG) that visible means of


    support, which are evident in the occupations of the accused, would not be a
    bar to the conviction under any one of the last four (4) clauses of the said
    act. The AG contends that "visible means of support" only applies to those
    "staying through the country".

    The courts decided that the mere missing of the punctuation cannot
    hold bar the argument of the AG, since the intention of the legislators was to
    prevent "loitering". It was stated that loitering was idling or wasting one's
    time. The time spent in saloons drum shops, and gambling houses is
    anything but that.

    The three defendants were earning a living by legitimate means in a degree


    of comfort higher than the average. Their sole offense was gambling, which
    the legislature has yet to make a subject of penal law.

    DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

    For these reasons, the defendants are ACQUITTED, with the costs de
    oficio.

    You might also like