[ G.R. No. L-240, April 17, 1947 ]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. CLARO CASTILLO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; THEORY OF SUSPENDED ALLEGIANCE, NOT ADOPTED; TREASON. The legal questions regarding suspended allegiance and change of sovereignty raised by counsel for the accused have been passed upon in the case of Laurel vs. Misa,
(L-409)[1]. Upon the strength of the rule therein laid down, the accused owed allegiance to the United States of America and the Commonwealth of the Philippines which he violated; the change of sovereignty does not affect the treason committed
by the accused, because it was against the people of the Philippines.
[1] 77 Phil., 853.
[1] 77 Phil., 853.