005. US v.

SWEET
1 Phil. 18 | September 20, 1901 | Ladd | APPEAL from an order of the Court of First Instance
of the city of Manila
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee,
PHILIP K. SWEET, defendant-appellant.
LADD, J.
Digest by Lilian Dy

Short Version:
Philip K. Sweet, an employee of the US military, assaulted a prisoner-of-war. Sweet claims
that the military tribunals, NOT the CFI, have jurisdiction over the case. The Court ruled that
under Act 136, the general principle that the jurisdiction of the civil tribunals (CFI) is
unaffected by the military or other special character of the person brought before them for
trial will prevail absent legislation to the contrary.

Facts:
1. Philip K. Sweet was charged with committing an offense punishable under the
Spanish Penal Code (Art 418) against a prisoner-of-war. The penalty for such an
offense is arresto mayor and a fine of 325 to 3250 pesetas
2. Sweet:
o Offense is punishable under the Spanish Military Code, which gives the military
tribunals jurisdiction over the case (SC: Spanish Military Code no longer in force
and not applicable to US military personnel)
o He was acting in the line of duty (SC: No evidence to prove such fact.)
o Being a military employee, he is exempted from the ordinary jurisdiction
of the civil courts

Issue:
WON the fact that the alleged offense was committed by an employee of the United States
military authorities deprive the court of jurisdiction?

Dispositive:
The order of the court below is AFFIRMED with costs to the appellant. The CFI has jurisdiction
over Sweets case.

Reasoning:
1. In Act No. 136 of the United States Philippine Commission, section 56 (6), Courts of
First Instance are given original jurisdiction "in all criminal cases in which a penalty of
more than six months' imprisonment or a fine exceeding one hundred dollars may be
imposed.
2. No law has been cited limiting the general jurisdiction conferred upon the CFI by Act
No. 136, with respect to US military employees, nor is the SC aware of any such law
or provision.
3. Therefore, the case is therefore open to the application of the general principle that
the jurisdiction of the civil tribunals is unaffected by the military or other special
character of the person brought before them for trial, a principle firmly established in
the law of England and America and which must, prevail under any system of
jurisprudence unless controlled by express legislation to the contrary.
4. Sweets claim that he was acting under orders of his military superiors may be
available by way of defense, but does not affect the right of the CFI to take
jurisdiction of the case.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Willard, and Mapa, JJ., concur Moreland, J., concurs in the result .

Cooper concurring:
Concurs with the result of the decision but believes that an offense charged against a
military officer in consequence of an act done in obedience to an order of his superior in
good faith, unless the illegality of the order is clearly shown on the face, where such offense
is against the military law, is not within the jurisdiction of the courts of the Civil Government.