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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 33 views

    People vs. Bernal

    Uploaded by

    manuelpadayogdog15
    The document summarizes a 1952 Supreme Court case, People vs. Bernal. It discusses that on September 20, 1947, Jose Bernal, a military police, had an altercation with Alfonso Pilones. Later that evening, their dispute was renewed and Pilones inflicted bolo wounds on Bernal. Bernal then reported the incident to his captain. The captain later sent Sgt. Benting to investigate Pilones, along with privates Roleda and Lomod. On their way to the camp, Pilones was shot and killed by Roleda on Benting's orders. The issue was whether an incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to an order can be considered a mitigating circumstance. The

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Bernal

    Uploaded by

    manuelpadayogdog15
    33 views1 page
    The document summarizes a 1952 Supreme Court case, People vs. Bernal. It discusses that on September 20, 1947, Jose Bernal, a military police, had an altercation with Alfonso Pilones. Later that evening, their dispute was renewed and Pilones inflicted bolo wounds on Bernal. Bernal then reported the incident to his captain. The captain later sent Sgt. Benting to investigate Pilones, along with privates Roleda and Lomod. On their way to the camp, Pilones was shot and killed by Roleda on Benting's orders. The issue was whether an incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to an order can be considered a mitigating circumstance. The

    Original Description:

    People vs. Bernal

    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 1952 Supreme Court case, People vs. Bernal. It discusses that on September 20, 1947, Jose Bernal, a military police, had an altercation with Alfonso Pilones. Later that evening, their dispute was renewed and Pilones inflicted bolo wounds on Bernal. Bernal then reported the incident to his captain. The captain later sent Sgt. Benting to investigate Pilones, along with privates Roleda and Lomod. On their way to the camp, Pilones was shot and killed by Roleda on Benting's orders. The issue was whether an incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to an order can be considered a mitigating circumstance. The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    33 views1 page

    People vs. Bernal

    Uploaded by

    manuelpadayogdog15
    The document summarizes a 1952 Supreme Court case, People vs. Bernal. It discusses that on September 20, 1947, Jose Bernal, a military police, had an altercation with Alfonso Pilones. Later that evening, their dispute was renewed and Pilones inflicted bolo wounds on Bernal. Bernal then reported the incident to his captain. The captain later sent Sgt. Benting to investigate Pilones, along with privates Roleda and Lomod. On their way to the camp, Pilones was shot and killed by Roleda on Benting's orders. The issue was whether an incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to an order can be considered a mitigating circumstance. The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    People vs.

    Bernal
    G.R. No. L-4409
    July 14, 1952

    FACTS: On September 20, 1947, Jose Bernal, military police had an altercation with Alfonso
    Pilones. In the evening the men met again and the dispute was renewed, Pilones inflicted bolo
    wounds on Bernal.Bernal reported the incident to Captain Trinidad who later called Sgt. Ricardo
    Benting to find and investigate Pilones. Benting called Pvts. Roleda Salvoro and Lomod to
    accompany him. On the way to the camp Pilones was shot and killed by appellant Roleda by order
    of Sgt. Benting.

    ISSUE: Whether or not an incomplete justifying circumstance of obedience to an order can be


    credited as a mitigating circumstance.

    RULING: Yes. The Solicitor General believes that Roleda merely obeyed the order of his sergeant.
    Roleda served as a subordinate of Sgt. Benting who gave the order. The soldiers were under the
    immediate command and control of their patrol leader, on this case, Sgt. Benting. In view of the
    foregoing, appellants Jose Bernal and Hermenigildo Salvoro are hereby acquitted with costs de
    officio. With the modification, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs.

    Hannah Padayogdog
    Criminal Law 1- Paras

    You might also like