ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
November-1941 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 48348 November 1, 1941 - AQUINO DEL ROSARIO v. BENGUET CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY, ET AL.

    073 Phil 371

  • G.R. No. 48524 November 1, 1941 - MANILA HOTEL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION v. MANILA HOTEL COMPANY, ET AL.

    073 Phil 374

  • G.R. No. 48662 November 6, 1941 - JESUS B. LAVA v. JOSE LOPEZ VITO, ET AL.

    073 Phil 390

  • G.R. No. 48306 November 7, 1941 - PEDRO L. GALANG v. P. M. ENDENCIA, ET AL.

    073 Phil 399

  • G.R. No. 48415 November 7, 1941 - INTERNATIONAL OIL FACTORY v. NATIONAL LABOR UNION, INC., ET AL.

    073 Phil 401

  • G.R. No. 48458 November 7, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FIDEL FORTUNO

    073 Phil 407

  • G.R. No. 48683 November 8, 1941 - GERONIMO SANTIAGO v. FAR EASTERN BROADCASTING

    073 Phil 408

  • G.R. No. 48183 November 10, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO A. SCHNECKENBURGER, ET AL.

    073 Phil 413

  • G.R. No. 48456 November 12, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. NGO CHAY

    073 Phil 418

  • G.R. No. 47813 November 18, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. SIMEON ANTONIO

    073 Phil 421

  • G.R. No. 48320 November 18, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. JUAN CACHERO

    073 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. 48459 November 18, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FIDEL FORTUNO

    073 Phil 429

  • G.R. No. 47805 November 19, 1941 - CONCEPCION PIÑON v. CONSUELO ZAFRA, ET AL.

    073 Phil 431

  • G.R. No. 48101 November 22, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE NABORA

    073 Phil 434

  • G.R. No. 48123 November 22, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ANACLETO VINEDA

    073 Phil 436

  • G.R. No. 48395 November 22, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ALEJANDRO ENCARNACION

    073 Phil 442

  • G.R. No. 48554 November 22, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. BILAANS S. SUNI

    073 Phil 445

  • G.R. No. 47688 November 24, 1941 - BASILIA CABRERA v. PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO., INC.

    073 Phil 448

  • G.R. No. 47988 November 24, 1941 - H. S. FENWICK v. JOAQUlN PARDO DE TAVERA

    073 Phil 452

  • G.R. No. 48641 November 24, 1941 - PEDRO GALLEGO v. VICENTE VERRA

    073 Phil 453

  • G.R. No. 47887 November 25, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. CARMEN DE UMALI

    073 Phil 460

  • G.R. No. 48125 November 25, 1941 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FELIX CABADDU

    073 Phil 462

  • G.R. No. 47357 November 26, 1941 - SALVADOR E. IMPERIAL v. CHINA INSURANCE & SURETY COMPANY, INC., ET AL.

    073 Phil 466

  • G.R. No. 47775 November 26, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANASTACIO FIGUEROA

    073 Phil 473

  • G.R. No. 47976 November 26, 1941 - A. P. SEVA Y OTROS v. PABLO S. RIVERA

    073 Phil 477

  • G.R. No. 48215 November 26, 1941 - PARSONS HARDWARE CO. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

    073 Phil 481

  • G.R. No. 48754 November 26, 1941 - EMILIO V. REYES v. APOLONIO R. DIAZ

    073 Phil 484

  • G.R. No. 47804 November 27, 1941 - JUAN CASTILLO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    073 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. 48147 November 27, 1941 - CLARO CASTRO, ET AL. v. ROSENDO REYES

    073 Phil 492

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 48458   November 7, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FIDEL FORTUNO<br /><br />073 Phil 407

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. 48458. November 7, 1941.]

    THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FIDEL FORTUNO, Defendant-Appellee.

    Armando Magpayo, for the Appellant.

    Acting First Assistant Solicitor-General Amparo and Assistant Solicitor-General Kapunan, Jr., for the Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE; "ESTAFA" ; ISSUANCE OF CHECK WITHOUT FUNDS TO COVER ITS AMOUNT. — The issuance of a check with knowledge on the part of the drawer that he has no funds to cover its amount and without informing the payee of such circumstance, does not constitute the crime of estafa if the check was intended as payment of a pre- existing obligation, as in the instant case. The reason for this rule is that deceit, to constitute estafa, should be the efficient cause of the defraudation and as such should either be prior to, or simultaneous with, the act of fraud.

    2. D.; ID.; EFFECT OF PLEA OF GUILTY. — Defendant’s plea of guilty is of no moment. Such plea constitutes a mere admission of the material allegations of the information but not that the facts thus alleged constitute an offense.


    D E C I S I O N


    MORAN, J.:


    Defendant Fidel Fortuno rented from "El Hogar Filipino" a room in the Crystal Arcade; and the rental having become due, he issued in favor of the latter a check for P60 drawn against the Bank of the Commonwealth. This check was, upon presentation to the bank for payment, dishonored for lack of funds. An information for estafa was presented against the defendant in the municipal court of Manila where, upon a plea of guilty, he was sentenced to two months and one day of arresto mayor and to pay an indemnity of P60 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Defendant appealed to the Court of First Instance where, after entering a plea of not guilty and thereafter substituting the same with the plea of guilty, he was sentenced to the same penalty imposed by the municipal court. Defendant interposed the present appeal from this judgment.

    The issuance of a check with knowledge on the part of the drawer that he has no funds to cover its amount and without informing the payee of such circumstance, does not constitute the crime of estafa if the check was intended as payment of a pre-existing obligation, as in the instant case. The reason for this rule is that deceit, to constitute estafa, should be the efficient cause of the defraudation and as such should either be prior to, or simultaneous with, the act of fraud. (Cf. People v. Lilius, 59 Phil., 339, 342; People v. Quesada, 60 Phil., 515 520.) .

    Defendant’s plea of guilty is of no moment. Such plea constitutes a mere admission of the material allegations of the information but not that the facts thus alleged constitute an offense.

    Judgment is reversed and the defendant is hereby acquitted with costs de oficio.

    Abad Santos, Diaz, Horrilleno and Ozaeta, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. 48458   November 7, 1941 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FIDEL FORTUNO<br /><br />073 Phil 407


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED