Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > January 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. L-3857 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL DA SILVA

010 Phil 39:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-3857. January 28, 1908. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANUEL DA SILVA, Defendant-Appellant.

M.G. Gavieres, for Appellant.

Attorney-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. ESTAFA. — Where, in order to obtain goods belonging to a third party, a person makes false representations, attributing to himself, with malice and criminal intent, the character of a member of an association, and delivers a vale or document stamped with the name of the supposed partner who is known to, and has the confidence of the owner of the goods, but without the knowledge and consent of the said supposed partner, the crime estafa, included in article 535, No. 1, of the Penal Code, is committed.


D E C I S I O N


TORRES, J. :


On the 3d of October, 1906, the accused, Manuel Da Silva, presented himself at the store of Chinaman Uy Yan, situated in Calle del Rosario, in the district of Binondo, Manila with a memorandum of goods that he desired to secure, but the Chinaman not knowing him, showed said memorandum to his agent, Julio Danon, who at the time was in the shop; thereupon the latter told the accused that, as he was not known to them, the goods which consisted of paints, cement, sheets of iron, and other things, could not be delivered to him; the accused, Silva, then stated to them that he was a partner with the merchant Carlos Pombo, and was authorized the latter to buy merchandise and sign for him; in view of this statement, Danon and the Chinaman told him to bring in a vale signed by the said Pombo and they would then deliver the goods to him. Silva then asked them to get the goods ready, as he would return at once with the vale, and, in fact, within an hour he returned with a vale bearing date of October 3, 1906, calling for several articles, signed by him and stamped with the name of Carlos Pombo. This is the same document offered by the prosecution as Exhibit A.

By virtue of the said vale, the goods stated therein were delivered to the accused who informed Chinaman Uy Yan and Julio Danon, that if at any time or on Saturdays, before the 3d of November, the day appointed for the payment of the price of the goods taken by him, they needed any money, they might call for it.

A few days after the goods were taken, Danon saw the accused and asked him whether he could pay some money on account. The accused then offered to pay him P300 within two or three days, but as the offer was not fulfilled, Julio Danon went in search of Carlos Pombo, and upon finding him, after a few days, asked him if he could pay the P300 offered by his partner; Pombo replied that he knew nothing regarding the vale, nor had any such goods been asked for by him, and that he was altogether ignorant of the matter. For this reason, Danon again sought the accused who, upon being informed of Pombo’s reply requested Danon not to see Pombo again, and promised that within twenty-four hours he would pay part of the value of the goods, and would produce security for the payment of the balance of the account, and, in addition, he addressed to Julio Danon the note which appears at folio 52 marked as "Exhibit B," promising to pay the value of the said goods. The offer was not, however, fulfilled nor was the security promised ever produced.

The goods were worth from P800 to P850, and belonged to the said Chinaman Uy Yan. The result of the investigation was that Carlos Pombo denied that he was a partner of the accused and also denied that he had ever authorized him to use the stamp with his name on the document marked "A", which does not coincide with the stub of the book in his office which was offered in the evidence of the trial, folio 20 of which shows that a vale for 60 pounds of ice was issued on the 30th of September, 1906; Pombo testified further that he had never seen the goods enumerated in the vale (Exhibit A) which goods, valued at P736, have not been returned nor has the price thereof ever been paid to the owner.

A complaint having been filed by reason of the foregoing, charging Manuel Da Silva with the crime of estafa, the corresponding proceedings were instituted, and the judge rendered judgment on the 31st of October, 1906, sentencing him to the penalty of four months and one day’s imprisonment, to return to Chinaman Uy Yan the merchandise that was delivered to him or otherwise to pay P736, the value thereof, and in case of insolvency, to suffer subsidiary imprisonment, and to pay the costs. From this judgment, the accused has appealed.

The facts stated above, duly proven in this case, constitute the crime of estafa defined and punished under articles 534, No. 2, and 535, No. 1, of the Penal Code, the latter of which articles is of the following tenor:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The following shall incur the penalties of the preceding articles:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1. He who shall defraud others by using a fictitious name, by assuming fictitious powers, influence, or attributes, or by pretending to possess imaginary property, credit, commission, enterprises, or business, or by using any other similar deceit that is not one of those mentioned in the following cases."cralaw virtua1aw library

The accused, Silva, who was not know to Chinaman Uy Yan or to Julio Danon, in order to obtain the goods enumerated in the vale marked "A," made use of false representations, attributing to himself deceitfully and with bad faith the character of a partner of Carlos Pombo, a well-known merchant of this city; also further alleging that he was authorized by the latter to sign his name, all of which was untrue. By means of said fraudulent statement, and of the document marked "Exhibit A," which is a vale with some printed letters and a No. 20 in figures, the goods he intended to obtain being stated in writing, the accused obtain the merchandise from the store of the offended party. The value of the goods was to have been paid on the 3d day of November, or one month after the date of the said vale; payment, however, was not effected. Such deceitful conduct unquestionably presents the characteristics of the crime of estafa, as defined by said article 535, NO. 1, inasmuch as the accused, instead of delivering to Carlos Pombo the goods taken from the store, sold them to C. Gomez, who in his turn disposed of them to Agapito Zialcita; and, in the meantime, the accused kept the representative of Uy Yan waiting with promises of payment which were never fulfilled, nor were the goods ever returned.

The accused pleaded not guilty, yet, notwithstanding his denial and the allegation that he was a partner of Pombo, full proof of his guilt as the author of the crime is contained in the case, for he failed to show that he was authorized to sign in the name and on behalf of Carlos Pombo, or that he was his partner, or that he had authority to use the stamp with the name of Carlos Pombo on the vale marked "Exhibit A," which later does not agree with the stub book produced by Pombo, and Pombo denies all of the allegations made by the accused. Therefore, there is no doubt that the accused simulated the vale marked "A" and stamped it with the stamp of Carlos Pombo, without the knowledge of its owner, for the purpose of deceiving the Chinaman Uy Yan, who was thereby subjected to loss by being deprived of the merchandise taken from his store to the value of P736, which was not paid.

In the commission of the crime neither a mitigating nor an aggravating circumstance is present, therefore, the penalty should be imposed in its medium degree, as has been done by the court below in the judgment appealed from.

Therefore, it is our opinion that the said judgment should be affirmed, as we do hereby affirm the same, provided, however, that the penalty imposed on the accused, Manuel Da Silva, shall be four months and one day of arresto mayor, with the accessories of article 61, and costs. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Johnson, 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






January-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3133 January 2, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH v. MUNICIPALITIES OF CUYAPO

    009 Phil 457

  • G.R. No. L-3736 January 2, 1908 - ALEXANDER DRAGON v. CARMEN DE LA CAVADA DE ENRIQUEZ

    009 Phil 461

  • G.R. No. L-3771 January 2, 1908 - PEDRO P. ROXAS v. ALEJANDRO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. L-3889 January 2, 1908 - JOSEFA VARELA v. ANTONIO MATUTE

    009 Phil 479

  • G.R. No. L-3890 January 2, 1908 - JOSEFA VARELA v. JOSEPHINE FINNICK

    009 Phil 482

  • G.R. No. L-3196 January 6, 1908 - CARMEN ZAMORA GONZAGA Y PILAR v. PEDRO MARTINEZ

    009 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. L-3777 January 6, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLASA PASCUAL

    009 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-2080 January 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX MELLIZA

    009 Phil 496

  • G.R. No. L-3631 January 8, 1908 - WARNER v. ROMAN JAUCIAN

    009 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. L-3987 January 8, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO TUPAS

    009 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. L-3997 January 8, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AGAPITO LAZADA

    009 Phil 509

  • G.R. No. L-3282 January 9, 1908 - RICARDO AGUADO v. CITY OF MANILA

    009 Phil 513

  • G.R. No. L-3603 January 9, 1908 - DIEGO RUGUIAN v. ROMAN RUGUIAN

    009 Phil 527

  • G.R. No. L-4023 January 9, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO MANANSALA

    009 Phil 529

  • G.R. No. L-4070 January 9, 1908 - JOSE R. INFANTE v. CATALINA MONTEMAYOR

    009 Phil 530

  • G.R. No. L-3687 January 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JOHN HAZLEY

    009 Phil 533

  • G.R. No. L-3772 January 10, 1908 - LAURENTE BALDOVINO v. PEDRO AMENOS

    009 Phil 537

  • G.R. No. L-3956 January 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIO CARRERO

    009 Phil 544

  • G.R. No. L-4044 January 10, 1908 - W. H. SAMMONS v. MACARIO FAVILA

    009 Phil 552

  • G.R. No. L-3866 January 11, 1908 - E. B. MERCHANT v. INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORP.

    009 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. L-3834 January 13, 1908 - ISODORA GACRAMA v. MARIA LOZADA

    009 Phil 560

  • G.R. No. L-4046 January 13, 1908 - PEDRO CASIMIRO v. JOSE FERNANDEZ

    009 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. L-4183 January 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ANDRES SORIANO

    009 Phil 564

  • G.R. No. L-4204 January 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIA TAO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 565

  • G.R. No. L-4387 January 13, 1908 - VICENTE PRIOLO v. PEDRO PRIOLO

    009 Phil 566

  • G.R. No. L-3592 January 14, 1908 - DALMACIO FRANCISCO v. GERONIMO TABADA

    009 Phil 568

  • G.R. No. L-3970 January 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO BUNSALAN

    009 Phil 571

  • G.R. No. L-3981 January 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. GASPAR ALVIR

    009 Phil 576

  • G.R. No. L-3731 January 15, 1908 - J. T. CASSELLS v. ROBERT R. REID, ET AL.

    009 Phil 580

  • G.R. No. L-3764 January 15, 1908 - LUISA PEÑA v. W. H. MITCHELL

    009 Phil 587

  • G.R. No. L-3859 January 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES, ET AL v. FELIX ARLANTE

    009 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. L-4184 January 15, 1908 - LUCILA BOYDON v. MATEO ANTONIO FELIX

    009 Phil 597

  • G.R. No. L-2625 January 16, 1908 - JOSE ITURRALDE v. RAMON MAGCAUAS

    009 Phil 599

  • G.R. No. L-2797 January 16, 1908 - JOSE ITURRALDE v. ANTONIO GARDUÑO

    009 Phil 605

  • G.R. No. L-3784 January 16, 1908 - ANTONIO ALVAREZ v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    009 Phil 608

  • G.R. No. L-4034 January 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CIRIACO EMPEINADO

    009 Phil 613

  • G.R. No. L-3595 January 17, 1908 - DOMINGO LEDESMA v. GREGORIO MARCOS

    009 Phil 618

  • G.R. No. L-3800 January 17, 1908 - MARCELA PERIZUELO ET AL. v. TEODORO S. BENEDICTO ET AL.

    009 Phil 621

  • G.R. No. L-3802 and L-3804 January 17, 1908 - TOMAS SUNICO v. FRANCISCO CHUIDIAN

    009 Phil 625

  • G.R. No. L-4036 January 17, 1908 - H. J. ANDREWS v. JUAN MORENTE ROSARIO

    009 Phil 634

  • G.R. No. L-3833 January 18, 1908 - JUAN AZARRAGA v. JOSE RODRIGUEZ

    009 Phil 637

  • G.R. No. L-3993 January 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. TEOFILO ALGURRA

    009 Phil 644

  • G.R. No. L-4188 January 18, 1908 - EMILE H. JOHNSON v. SANCHO BALANTACBO

    009 Phil 647

  • G.R. No. L-3940 January 20, 1908 - MILLER v. HENRY M. JONES

    009 Phil 648

  • G.R. No. L-4149 January 20, 1908 - ENRIQUE F. SOMES v. RAFAEL MOLINA Y SALVADOR

    009 Phil 653

  • G.R. No. L-3934 January 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AMBROSIO ESTABILLO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 668

  • G.R. No. L-2554 January 22, 1908 - ANTONIO MINA v. VICTORINO LUSTINA

    009 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-3155 January 22, 1908 - JOHN BORDMAN v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    009 Phil 679

  • G.R. No. L-3355 January 22, 1908 - BONIFACIO MENDOZA v. FRANCISCO NABONG

    009 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. L-4019 January 22, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE DIMAYUGA

    009 Phil 687

  • G.R. No. L-3015 January 23, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH v. MUNICIPALITIES IN PROV. OF ORIENTAL NEGROS

    009 Phil 691

  • G.R. No. L-3888 January 23, 1908 - HENRY W. ELIOT v. CATALINA MONTEMAYOR, ET AL.

    009 Phil 693

  • G.R. No. L-3013 January 24, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC v. MUN. IN THE PROV. OF ILOCOS SUR

    010 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-3705 January 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX BOQUILON

    010 Phil 4

  • G.R. No. L-3008 January 25, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC v. MUN. IN THE PROV. OF ILOILO

    010 Phil 8

  • G.R. No. L-3502 January 25, 1908 - RAFAEL ENRIQUEZ v. FLORENCIA VICTORIA

    010 Phil 10

  • G.R. No. L-3538 January 25, 1908 - LA SOCIEDAD "GERMINAL v. MANUEL NUBLA

    010 Phil 18

  • G.R. No. L-3782 January 25, 1908 - ANTONIO ZARAGOZA v. RAMON M. DE VIADEMONTE

    010 Phil 23

  • G.R. No. L-4029 January 25, 1908 - IN RE: DOMINGA BUTALID

    010 Phil 27

  • G.R. No. L-4153 January 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PABLO GUEVARA

    010 Phil 37

  • G.R. No. L-3857 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL DA SILVA

    010 Phil 39

  • G.R. No. L-3874 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIO LEYVA

    010 Phil 43

  • G.R. No. L-3947 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMEON AGRAVANTE

    010 Phil 46

  • G.R. No. L-3533 January 29, 1908 - JUAN TUASON v. CEFERINO DOMINGO LIM

    010 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. 3673 January 29, 1908 - MARIANO GUERERRO v. ANTONIO MIGUEL

    010 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-4030 January 29, 1908 - MARIA ANIVERSARIO v. FLORENCIO TERNATE

    010 Phil 53

  • G.R. No. L-3481 January 30, 1908 - GABINO PISARRILLO v. VICENTE LADIA

    010 Phil 58

  • G.R. No. L-4010 January 30, 1908 - VICTOR RAVAGO v. MACARIO BACUD

    010 Phil 60

  • G.R. No. L-4273 January 30, 1908 - VICENTA FABIE Y GUTIERREZ v. CITY OF MANILA

    010 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. L-3832 January 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ISAIAS GONZALEZ

    010 Phil 66

  • G.R. No. L-3882 January 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARTIN RUBIO CO-PINCO

    010 Phil 69