Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > November 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. 4523 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS CARREON, ET AL.

012 Phil 51:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 4523. November 16, 1908. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NICOLAS CARREON, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Arsenio Cruz Herrera, for Appellants.

Attorney-General Villamor; for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. STOLEN PROPERTY; SUFFICIENCY OF PROOF; PRESUMPTION. —When property alleged to have been stolen is found in the possession of a person not the owner, before it can be presumed that he acquired the property by theft or robbery, it must first be proven that such a crime has been committed.


D E C I S I O N


JOHNSON, J. :


These defendants were charged with the crime of larceny. They were duly arrested, tried in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Bulacan and were found guilty, "as accessories of the said crime of the theft," and were sentenced, each one, to the penalty of one month and eleven days of arresto mayor, with the accessory penalties prescribed by law, to return, jointly and severally to the offended parties, Catalino Barreto and Perfecto Pascual, the sum of P60 received from them, and, in case of insolvency, to suffer the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment which must not exceed one-third of the principal penalty, and each of them to pay one-half of the costs; the above-mentioned imprisonment to be served in the provincial jail of Bulacan.

From this sentence the defendants appealed.

From an examination of the record brought to this court the following facts appear to have been proved:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

That on or about the 7th day of April, 1906, in the barrio of Bagbaguin, of the municipality of Polo, in the Province of Bulacan, Catalino Barreto and Perfecto Pascual being then each the owner of a carabao, lost possession of them. The evidence does not disclose in what manner or in what way they lost possession of them; that some two or three days later, while looking for the carabaos, the owners found them in the possession of the defendant, Nicolas Carreon; the owners requested Nicolas Carreon to return to them the said carabaos, whereupon he (Nicolas Carreon) referred them to his brother, Juan Carreon, who was then a councilman of his barrio; the owners went to Juan and informed him that their carabaos were in the possession of Nicolas and demanded possession of the same. Juan refused to deliver to the owners the said carabaos unless they should pay him the sum of P100 or P120. There is some confusion in the testimony about the amount of money which Juan demanded; however, the owners paid the sum of P60, and promised to pay the balance of P100 in a few days, and thereby obtained possession of the carabaos.

There is no evidence in the record showing how the owners lost possession of the carabaos. There is nothing to show that they had been stolen. The proof does not disclose that the defendants had received the carabaos from persons who had stolen them. There is not sufficient proof in the record to show that the defendants were guilty of the crime charged nor of the crime of which they were found guilty in the lower court; therefore the sentence of the lower court is hereby revoked and the defendants are ordered to be discharged from the custody of the law. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Mapa and Willard, JJ., concur.

Carson and Tracey, JJ., dissent.

Separate Opinions


TORRES, J., dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

In criminal proceedings instituted for the crime of theft or robbery, the courts have constantly upheld the rule, in accordance with the principles of criminal law, that the finding of the stolen property in the possession of a person establishes the presumption that he is the author of the crime, unless it be satisfactorily proven that another person is the author thereof, and that the stolen property found in the possession of the accused, was received from the former. This doctrine has been followed by this court in several of its decisions.

In the case at bar it has been fully established that several carabaos disappeared from the place where they were kept, the owners thereof assuming that the animals were stolen; and that, after a search of fifteen days by said owners, the animals were found in the possession of the accused, who refused, to return the animals to their owners until the latter paid them a ransom of P60.

The accused herein have not proven nor satisfactorily explained why the animals were found in their possession, and, assuming the existence of the crime, and in accordance with the provisions of articles 517 and 518, No. 2, in its relation with article 68, of the Penal Code, it must be considered that Juan Carreon is an accessory and Nicolas Carreon is the principal thereof.

In my opinion, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed as to Juan Carreon and should be reversed as to Nicolas Carreon. and that the latter should be sentenced to two years of presidio correccional, and to the accessories of article 58, with one-half of the costs. Proceedings for estafa should be instituted against the accused, in case an information be filed by the provincial fiscal, on account of the illegal demand for P60 as a ransom for the animals.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





November-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 4621 November 2, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUANA AYARDI

    011 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. 3712 November 4, 1908 - CANDIDO CONCEPCION v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

    011 Phil 552

  • G.R. No. 3879 November 4, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PRUDENCIO ARCOS

    011 Phil 555

  • G.R. No. 4238 November 4, 1908 - FRANK B. INGERSOLL v. VENTURA CHUI-TIAN LAY, ET AL.

    011 Phil 564

  • G.R. No. 4605 November 4, 1908 - IGNACIO REMONTAN v. ALEJANDRO CABACUNGAN

    011 Phil 571

  • G.R. No. 4440 November 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. HILARIO GALANCO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 575

  • G.R. No. 4232 November 7, 1908 - FELIX BAUTISTA v. AQUILINA TIONGSON, ET AL.

    011 Phil 579

  • G.R. No. 4389 November 10, 1908 - GLICERIA MARELLA v. VICENTE REYES

    012 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. 3753 November 11, 1908 - HERRANZ & GARRIZ v. ROMAN BARBUDO

    012 Phil 5

  • G.R. No. 4515 November 11, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ISIDRO SERVILLAS

    012 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. 4777 November 11, 1908 - SUILIONG & CO. v. SILVINA CHIO-TAYSAN

    012 Phil 13

  • G.R. No. 4450 November 11, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LUCINA MACASPAC

    012 Phil 26

  • G.R. No. 4636 November 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RAMON NERI ABEJUELA

    012 Phil 30

  • G.R. No. 4476 November 14, 1908 - FELIX SAMSON, ET AL. v. MARIANO HONRADO

    012 Phil 37

  • G.R. No. 4517 November 14, 1908 - HIJOS DE I. DE LA RAMA v. VALENTIN INVENTOR

    012 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. 4523 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS CARREON, ET AL.

    012 Phil 51

  • G.R. No. 4581 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PABILO ESCALONA

    012 Phil 54

  • G.R. No. 2994 November 18, 1908 - ILDEFONSA VARGAS v. AGATONA EGAMINO

    012 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. 4082 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL LORENZANA, ET AL.

    012 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. 4211 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SECUNDINO MENDEZONA

    012 Phil 72

  • G.R. No. 4457 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMONA ESCOBAÑAS

    012 Phil 80

  • G.R. No. 4607 November 18, 1908 - P. D. COLBERT v. E. M. BACHRACH

    012 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. 4740 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    012 Phil 87

  • G.R. No. 4774 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. A. H. BARNES

    012 Phil 93

  • G.R. No. 4779 November 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. VICTORIA VEDRA

    012 Phil 96

  • G.R. No. 4821 November 20, 1908 - J. McMICKING v. T. KIMURA, ET AL.

    012 Phil 98

  • G.R. No. 4314 November 21, 1908 - LORENZA QUISON, ET AL. v. HIGINA SALUD

    012 Phil 109

  • G.R. No. 4315 November 21, 1908 - KUENZLE & STREIFF v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    012 Phil 117

  • G.R. No. 4671 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIANO J. TORRES

    012 Phil 121

  • G.R. No. 4675 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RICARDO MENDIOLA

    012 Phil 125

  • G.R. No. 4722 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. TAN TAYCO, ET AL.

    012 Phil 127

  • G.R. No. 4597 November 23, 1908 - JOSE GARCIA RON v. LA COMPANIA DE MINAS DE BATAN

    012 Phil 130

  • G.R. No. 4795 November 23, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO BOSTON

    012 Phil 134

  • G.R. No. 4557 November 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AGAPITO ROSAL

    012 Phil 135

  • G.R. No. 1598 November 30, 1908 - JOSE PALACIOS v. MUNICIPALITY OF CAVITE

    012 Phil 140