January 1940 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
069 Phil 465:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 46928. January 29, 1940.]
EL PUEBLO DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS, querellante-apelado, contra BASILIO EVANGELISTA Y JOSON (alias BASILIO JOSON, alias JOSE EVANGELISTA), acusado-apelante.
Sr. Amador Constantino en representacion del apelante.
El Procurador-General Sr. Ozaeta y el auxiliar Sr. Kapunan en representacion del apelado.
SYLLABUS
2. ID.; ID.; DELINCUENCIA HABITUAL. — Aunque entre las previas convicciones que se mencionan en la querella hay la de haber sido el apelante condenado previamente por hurto calificado, habiendo el fiscal excluido esta alegacion, las demas previas convicciones del apelante se reducen a tres, para los efectos de la delincuencia habitual, en vista de las fechas de estas convicciones, viniendo asi a sel la presente conviccion la cuarta.
Se ha seguido esta causa con arreglo a la siguiente querella:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"That on or about the 4th day of August 1939, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously defraud Marcos Cano as follows, to wit: the said accused under false and fraudulent manifestations and representations which he made upon said Marcos Cano to the effect that he was an employee in the Manila Gas Corporation and that he could .Secure employment for persons who are willing to work as painters in said firm at a daily wage of P2.50, provided he is given money to buy painting equipment, and by means of similar deceit, induced said Marcos Cano to recommend his brothel, Jose Cano, and his brother-in-law, Antonio Gatmaitan, to said accused, and to give him (accused), as in fact he was given the sum of P15.50 for the purchase of painting equipment, said accused then and there fully knowing that he was not employed in the Manila Gas Corporation and neither did he have any power or influence to recommend and employ persons to work therein, and that those manifestations and representations were only made for the purpose of obtaining, as in fact he obtained, the sum of P15.50, and once in possession of said sum, said accused absconded himself and willfully, unlawfully and feloniously misappropriated, misapplied and converted the said sum to his own personal use and benefit, to the damage and prejudice of said Marcos Cano, Jose Cano, and Antonio Gatmaitan in the said sum of P15.50, Philippine currency.
"That the said accused has been previously convicted of the crimes of theft and estafa by virtue of final judgments rendered by competent court as follows:
Date of Crime Sentence Date of Date of
arrest sentence release
9-2-26 Estafa, Court of First Inst 1 month, 1 day, and P8 in- 12-11-26
ance D-3394. demnity.
Estafa, Court ol First Inst- 1 month, 1 day, and P5.50 12-11-26 2-10-27
ance D-33941. indemnity.
Estafa, Court ol First Inst- 2 months 1 day, and P10 9-2-27
ance D-35166. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 1 month, 1 day and P3 in- 9-2-27
ance D-35165. demnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 2 months, 1 day, and P10 9-2-27
ance D-35168. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 2 months, 1 day, and P15 9-2-27
ance D-35167. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3months and P12 indem- 9-2-27
ance D-35170. nity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months and P15 indem- 9-2-27
ance D-35169.1 nity
10 27 28 Qualified theft, Court of 4 years, 2 months and 1 day 7-30-29 11-7-37
First Instance D-37305. plus 21 years additional
penalty.
9-16-26 Estafa, Court of First Inst. - 3 months, 11 days and P1.50 1-12-37
ance D-53265. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months, 11 days and P1.20 1-12-37
ance D 53264. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months, 11 days, and P6
ance D-5321;6. indemnty. 1-12-37
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months, 11 days, and P4 1-12-37
ance D-53267. indemnity.
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months, 11 days, and P2 1-12-37
ance D-53268 indemnity
Estafa, Court of First Inst- 3 months, 11 days, and P3 1-12-37 9-9-38
ance D-53269. indemnity.
and is therefore a habitual delinquent under the provisions of article 62, paragraph 5, of the Revised Penal Code, the date of his release from confinement in connection with his last conviction of estafa being September 9, 1938."cralaw virtua1aw library
El apelante, al ser informado de la querella anterior, declaro ser culpable del delito acusado en la misma y el Juzgado le condeno a la pena de dos meses y un dia de arresto mayor, mas a la pena adicional de seis años y un dia de prision mayor, por ser delincuente habitual, y a pagar a la parte of endida la cantidad de P15.50, con las costas.
Los hechos acusados en la querella constituyen el delito de estafa definido en el articulo 315, No. 4, subseccion 2-A, que se castiga con arresto mayor en su grado medio y maximo, o sea, de dos meses y un dia a seis meses. Habiendo concurrido la circunstancia atenuante de haberse declarado culpable el apelante, compensada con la agravante de reincidencia, debe imponerse esta pena en su grado medio, o sea, de tres meses y once dias a cuatro meses y veinte dias.
Aunque entre las previas convicciones que se mencionan es la querella hay la de haber sido el apelante condenado previamente por hurto calificado, habiendo el fiscal excluido esta alegacion, las demas previas convicciones del apelante se reducen a tres, para los efectos de la delincuencia habitual, en vista de las fechas de estas convicciones, viniendo asi a ser la presente conviccion la cuarta. Por esta razon la pena adicional impuesta por el Juzgado es correcta.
Entendiendose de tres meses y once dias la pena principal que se impone al apelante, se confirma en lo demas la sentencia apelada, con las costas. Asi se ordena.
Villa-Real, Imperial, Diaz, Laurel y Ccncepcion, MM., estan conformes.
