Scribd
Upload
525 views1 page

US v. Capillo & Paduga Case Summary

Defendants Saturnino and Petrona took Saturnino's one-month old son without the mother's permission and agreed to deliver the child to Chua Pue Tee in exchange for money. While the court acknowledged this was a heartless sale of the child, the specific offense in the information of unlawful sale of a child by its father is not defined or penalized under the relevant Penal Code article. Therefore, the court dismissed the case as the defendants were not properly charged for any offense actually committed under Philippine law.

Uploaded by

Anonymous b4ycWuoIc
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
525 views1 page

US v. Capillo & Paduga Case Summary

Defendants Saturnino and Petrona took Saturnino's one-month old son without the mother's permission and agreed to deliver the child to Chua Pue Tee in exchange for money. While the court acknowledged this was a heartless sale of the child, the specific offense in the information of unlawful sale of a child by its father is not defined or penalized under the relevant Penal Code article. Therefore, the court dismissed the case as the defendants were not properly charged for any offense actually committed under Philippine law.

Uploaded by

Anonymous b4ycWuoIc
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

THE UNITED STATES v.

SATURNINO CAPILLO and PETRONA PADUGA


G.R. No. L-9279, March 25, 1915

FACTS:
Defendants Saturnino and Petrona, did took a one-month old child, the legitimate son of defendant
Saturnino and Umanbang, without the permission of the mother and agreed with one Chua Pue Tee to deliver to him
the said child in exchange of money. The accused prayed for the case to be dismissed, basing their contention upon
the fact that the information fails to show facts of sufficient weight to constitute a cause of action, that is, that the facts
stated do not constitute a crime.

ISSUE:
Is the prayer tenable?

RULING:
Yes. The transaction set forth in the information was in truth and effect a heartless sale of his own flesh and
blood by the accused for one hundred and odd pesos. However the Court found that the offense defined and
penalized in article 468 of the Penal Code is not the unlawful sale of a child by its father, and that such conduct
cannot properly be penalized under its provisions. If the accused has been guilty of conduct constituting an offense of
this kind, in violation of the laws of the Philippine Islands, he should be charged with and tried for the offense actually
committed, so that the penalty to be imposed upon conviction may be adjudged by the courts in accord with the
provisions of the statute defining and penalizing the crime of which he is found guilty. The case was dismissed.

You might also like