Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1910 > August 1910 Decisions > G.R. No. 5654 August 27, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. FELIPE QUINTANAR ET AL.

016 Phil 504:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 5654. August 27, 1910. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FELIPE QUINTANAR ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Clarin & Alonso, for Appellants.

Attorney-General Villamor, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. ERROR IN TRANSLATION OF SECTION 32 OF THE OPIUM LAW; ENGLISH TEXT OF LAWS MUST GOVERN. — Counsel for appellants admits that defendants smoked opium on the night of March 1, 1908, but claims that they can not be convicted, because, according to the Spanish translation of section 32 of Act No. 1761 (The Opium Law), the Act did not go into effect until "after March first:" Held, That the Spanish translation of section 32 of the Opium Law is erroneous, and should read "on and after March first," in accordance with the English text, which latter must govern, as provided by law. (Sec. 1, Act No. 63.)


D E C I S I O N


TRENT, J. :


These three defendants, Felipe Quintanar, Gorgonio Sañiel, and Justo Modelo, were accused of having violated the provisions of section 32 of Act No. 1761, known as the "Opium Law." They were arraigned, tried, and sentenced by the Court of First Instance of the Province of Cebu each to one year of imprisonment, to pay a fine of P500, to suffer the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs pro rata. From this judgment and sentence they appealed.

The guilt of the appellants has been established beyond any question of doubt, inasmuch as they were caught in the very act of smoking opium on the night of March 1, 1908. The opium pipe and other paraphernalia used for smoking this drug were seized by the policemen at the time the appellants were arrested. These articles were exhibited in the court below and properly identified.

It is insisted that the appellants could not have been legally convicted under the provisions of section 32 of said Act No. 1761 for the reason that, according to the proofs presented, they smoked opium on the night of March 1, 1908, and that as this section did not go into effect until after March 1 of that year, its provisions could not have been violated on that night. In support of this theory counsel for appellants relies upon the Spanish translation of the first part of this section (32) which provides that "despues del primero de Marzo," etc. This is not a correct translation. The English text, which provides that "on and after March 1, 1908," is the one which must govern, according to the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 63. The appellants can not escape the penalty imposed by the said section on account of its erroneous translation. (U. S. v. Bacarrisas, 6 Phil. Rep., 539.)

The penalties imposed by the court below are within the limits provided in section 32 of Act No. 1761, but in view of the fact that the appellants committed this crime on the very day that this section went into effect, and taking into consideration the fact that this is the first offense, we are of the opinion that the said penalties are, in strict justice, too severe. The judgment is therefore reversed, and each of these appellants is sentenced to three months’ imprisonment and to pay one-third of the costs of this cause.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson and Moreland, 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-1910 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 6185 August 2, 1910 - POTENCIANO TABIGUE ET AL. v. WILLIAM P. DUVALL

    016 Phil 324

  • G.R. No. 2308 August 3, 1910 - NIEVES ARAUJO ET AL. v. GREGORIA CELIS

    016 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 4968 August 3, 1910 - SALVADOR LOPEZ v. RAFAEL ENRIQUEZ ET AL.

    016 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 5123 August 3, 1910 - KELLY SPRINGFIELD ROAD ROLLER CO. v. CRISPULO SIDECO

    016 Phil 345

  • G.R. No. 5483 August 3, 1910 - AMBROSIO MARASIGAN v. PATRICK J. MOORE ET AL.

    016 Phil 354

  • G.R. No. 6250 August 3, 1910 - LOPE SEVERINO v. GOVERNOR-GEN. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS, ET AL.

    016 Phil 366

  • G.R. No. 5693 August 4, 1910 - ENRIQUE DELGADO, ET AL.vs. AGUSTIN AMENABAR

    016 Phil 403

  • G.R. No. 5827 August 4, 1910 - CHINESE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. PUA TE CHING ET AL.

    016 Phil 406

  • G.R. No. 5684 August 5, 1910 - MANILA SUBURBAN RAILWAYS CO. v. ENGRACION SANTIAGO

    016 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 5737 August 5, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. ENRIQUE LOPEZ SY QUINGCO, ET AL.

    016 Phil 416

  • G.R. No. 5762 August 5, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MATIAS GRANADOSO ET AL.

    016 Phil 419

  • G.R. No. 5242 August 6, 1910 - ALDECOA & CO. v. WARNER

    016 Phil 423

  • G.R. No. 5728 August 11, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. JAMES O. PHELPS

    016 Phil 440

  • G.R. No. 5477 August 12, 1910 - NON-CHRISTIAN GULIB ET AL. v. NON-CHRISTIAN BUCQUIO ET AL.

    016 Phil 444

  • G.R. No. 5356 August 17, 1910 - CHINO DIEVEA v. MODESTO ACUÑA CO CHONGCO

    016 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. 5486 August 17, 1910 - JOSE DE LA PEÑA Y DE RAMON v. FEDERICO HIDALGO

    016 Phil 450

  • G.R. No. 5720 August 20, 1910 - MARIANO ESCUETA v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    016 Phil 482

  • G.R. No. 5628 August 22, 1910 - BERNARDA ALIASAS ET AL. v. PEDRO ALCANTARA ET AL.

    016 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. 5785 August 23, 1910 - GO TO SUN v. H. B. McCOY

    016 Phil 497

  • G.R. No. 5671 August 24, 1910 - BENITO DE LOS REYES v. VERONICA ALOJADO

    016 Phil 499

  • G.R. No. 5654 August 27, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. FELIPE QUINTANAR ET AL.

    016 Phil 504

  • G.R. No. 5813 August 27, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO ESPIA

    016 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. 5636 August 29, 1910 - VALENTINA HERNANDEZ v. DOMINGO ANTONIO

    016 Phil 507

  • G.R. No. 5710 August 29, 1910 - LEONARDO OSORIO v. MARIANO TRIAS

    016 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. 5708 August 30, 1910 - CIRIACO TUMACDER v. JOSE NUEVA ET AT.

    016 Phil 513