Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > August 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. 4032 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARCELO F. CONCEPCION

011 Phil 90:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 4032. August 15, 1908. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARCELO F. CONCEPCION, Defendant-Appellant.

Mariano Monroy for Appellant.

Attorney-General Araneta for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. FALSIFICATION OF A MUNICIPAL PAY ROLL. — The falsification of a payroll by a municipal treasurer and the misappropriation by him of funds intended for the payment of salaries of local officials and employees, does not deprive the latter of the right to demand payment of their salaries by the municipality. The municipality is the only party aggrieved by the act of the treasurer, and is therefore entitled to the indemnity which the accused is sentenced to pay.


D E C I S I O N


MAPA, J. :


It has been fully proven in this case that, on the 9th of August, 1906, the accused, being then the municipal treasurer of Guindulman, Province of Bohol, made out the pay roll of the officers and employees of said municipality, which he later submitted to the district auditor as a voucher to his accounts; that he certified therein under oath that the amounts which appeared in the said pay roll opposite the respective names, had been duly paid as salaries to each and all of the said officers and employees, when as a matter of fact this was not true, inasmuch as several of them had not received the sums stated as having been paid. Such an act constitutes the crime of falsification of a public document, by perverting the truth in the statement of facts, as defined in No. 4 of article 300 of the Penal Code. Therefore, the judgment appealed from, and which thus qualifies it and considers that the guilt of the accused as the author of said crime has been proven, is in accordance with the law and the merits of the case.

The penalty of fourteen years eight months and one day of cadena temporal and a fine of 1,250 pesetas, imposed on the accused by the said judgment, is likewise in accordance with the law.

The court below also sentenced the accused to indemnify the employees in the sums which appear on the pay roll as paid to them, they not having been so paid. It does not appear to us that this part of the judgment is correct. The said employees are not the parties that were injured by the falsification that gave rise to these proceedings; they have not been deprived of the right which they retain, to recover from the municipality the full amount of the salary which it owes them by reason of the;said falsification. The act of the accused in misappropriating municipal funds, under the pretest of making payments, by falsifying a pay roll, affects only the municipality owning such funds and not its employees. They have nothing to do with the custody, management, and responsibility of the treasury of said municipality, nor should they suffer the consequences of any shortage that might result therein. The municipality, being the only party aggrieved, is entitled to the indemnity which the accused is sentenced to pay.

The deficit found in the municipal treasury as the result of the final examination made by the district auditor of the accounts of the accused, taking into account the sums actually paid and those that were not from the pay roll in question, amounts to the total sum of P275.74, according to the declaration of said auditor and the statements of account under Exhibits B and C of the prosecution. That is the sum in which the accused should indemnify the municipality.

The judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed with the sole modification that the payment of the indemnity to which the accused has been sentenced, amounting to the sum of P275.74, shall be made in favor of the municipality of Guindulman, with the costs of this instance against the accused. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Carson, Willard and Tracey, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






August-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 3837 August 1, 1908 - BENIGNO CATABIAN v. FRANCISCO TUNGCUL

    011 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. 4537 August 1, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO POBRE

    011 Phil 51

  • G.R. No. 4381 August 4, 1908 - MANUEL LOPEZ, ET AL. v. RAMON N. OROZCO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 53

  • G.R. No. 4498 August 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LEOCADIO SALGADO

    011 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. 3831 August 6, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CANUTO BUTARDO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 60

  • G.R. No. 4519 August 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO IDON

    011 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. 3897 August 10, 1908 - ZACARIAS OMO v. INSULAR GOV’T.

    011 Phil 67

  • G.R. No. 4133 August 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO DULFO

    011 Phil 75

  • G.R. No. 4027 August 12, 1908 - JOSEFA GARCIA PASCUAL v. LUIS PALOMAR BALDOVI

    011 Phil 79

  • G.R. No. 4054 August 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. GUILLERMO ALVARADO

    011 Phil 87

  • G.R. No. 4032 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARCELO F. CONCEPCION

    011 Phil 90

  • G.R. No. 4141 August 15, 1908 - AGUSTINA FAELNAR, ET AL. v. JACINTA ESCAÑO

    011 Phil 92

  • G.R. No. 4330 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO FENIX

    011 Phil 95

  • G.R. No. 4340 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CHESTER A. DAVIS

    011 Phil 96

  • G.R. No. 4464 August 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIPE IDOS

    011 Phil 99

  • G.R. No. 4277 August 18, 1908 - POTENCIANA TABIGUE v. FRANK E. GREEN

    011 Phil 102

  • G.R. No. 4282 August 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CHIONG CHUICO

    011 Phil 106

  • G.R. No. 4287 August 18, 1908 - PHIL. PRODUCTS CO. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    011 Phil 107

  • G.R. No. 4317 August 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO MONTECILLO

    011 Phil 109

  • G.R. No. 3818 August 19, 1908 - EDWARD B. MERCHANT v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

    011 Phil 116

  • G.R. No. 4223 August 19, 1908 - NICOLAS LUNOD, ET AL. v. HIGINO MENESES

    011 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. 4382 August 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

    011 Phil 133

  • G.R. No. 4468 August 21, 1908 - RUBERT & GUAMIS v. C. A. SMITH

    011 Phil 138

  • G.R. No. 4015 August 24, 1908 - ANGEL JAVELLANA v. JOSE LIM, ET AL.

    011 Phil 141

  • G.R. No. 4390 August 24, 1908 - ANG TOA v. BASILIA ALVAREZ, ET AL.

    011 Phil 146

  • G.R. No. 4365 August 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FERNANDO ESTABILLO

    011 Phil 150

  • G.R. No. 4384 August 27, 1908 - SIMEON ALCONABA, ET AL. v. MAGNO ABINEZ

    011 Phil 152

  • G.R. No. 4410 August 27, 1908 - URBANO FLORIANO v. ESTEBAN DELGADO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 154

  • G.R. No. 4477 August 27, 1908 - IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MALIGNAD v. BRIGIDA

    011 Phil 158

  • G.R. No. 4529 August 27, 1908 - LUISA TENGCO v. VICENTE SANZ

    011 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. 4513 August 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMON CABONCE

    011 Phil 169

  • G.R. No. 4642 August 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIDNEY LEE BAYLEES

    011 Phil 172

  • G.R. No. 4383 August 31, 1908 - ZACARIAS BAGSA v. CRISOSTOMO NAGRAMADA

    011 Phil 174

  • G.R. No. 4385 August 31, 1908 - WALTER E. OLSEN v. BERT YEARSLEY

    011 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 4411 August 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RUFINO DELOSO

    011 Phil 180

  • G.R. No. 4689 August 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. GO TIAO

    011 Phil 183