Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1910 > February 1910 Decisions > G.R. No. 5624 February 3, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO FELICIANO

015 Phil 144:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 5624. February 3, 1910. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARIANO FELICIANO, Defendant-Appellant.

Silvestre Apacible, for Appellant.

Solicitor-General Harvey, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. MISAPPROPRIATION. — When upon the official examination of the accounts of a treasurer there is shown an apparent shortage of the cash, and upon notice thereof the treasurer immediately produces and delivers to the examiner the money necessary to balance the accounts, a charge of violation of Act No. 1740 can not be sustained, inasmuch as it is not even prima facie a case of misappropriation.


D E C I S I O N


ARELLANO, C.J. :


The defendant, Mariano Feliciano, is charge with having misappropriated and applied to his own use the sum of P53.05 in his custody as municipal treasurer and deputy provincial treasurer for the municipality of San Pedro Macati, in violation of section 1 of Act No. 1740, which punishes the appropriation of public funds and their application to personal use. The Court of First Instance of the Province of Rizal sentenced him to two months’ imprisonment, to pay a fine of P12 and costs, and from this judgment the accused has appealed.

One of the grounds for the appeal to this court is that, in the present case, Act No. 1740 has been invoked instead of article 392, paragraph 3, of the Penal Code.

In connection with the legal point thus raised, all that is said by this court in the decision rendered on this date in case No. 5623, U. S. v. Jose Feliciano. 1 for identically the same crime, should be considered as reproduced herein.

The other reason alleged is that the court below erred in considering that the facts proven in this case constitute the crime of misappropriation of public funds.

A deputy auditor testified that on the 20th of May, 1908, he went to the municipality of San Pedro Macati for the purpose of making an inspection of the office, cash, and accounts of the municipal treasury of said town, of which Mariano Feliciano was the treasurer; that there resulted from the examination as shortage of P53.05 in the cash of the municipal treasury; that at the moment when the difference was discovered he notified the treasurer of it, and the latter took the sum of P53.05 from his pocket and paid it, but he did not remember, however, whether he had questioned the treasurer as to why the amount was not in the safe; and that, at the time when the examination was made, there were other persons present, to wit, the municipal president and the municipal secretary.

When the above witnesses were examined, the first named stated that they were called by the deputy auditor at the commencement of the examination in order to witness the same, and he remembered that there was a deficit of some fifty-odd pesos and that the treasurer at once paid the money that was lacking, taking the same out of his own pocket. The second witness stated that he was not present at the commencement of the examination, and that it was only when the shortage was discovered that the deputy auditor called him in to bear witness thereto; that, as he remembered, it amounted to more than P50; that what he did see was that the shortage was at once covered by the treasurer, Mariano Feliciano, who took the necessary amount from his pocket.

The accused being placed on the stand testified that an examination of the casha and accounts kept by him as municipal treasurer was made on the 20th of May, 1908, and that when the examiner called his attention to the fact that there was a shortage of some 79-odd pesos, he told the latter that there was more money in a small box in the safe, which was true, as the examiner has certified; that subsequently the latter observed that even with this there was still money lacking, and the witness then recalled that he had money in his desk representing the remainder of certain payments for wages of laborers, which money he also presented to the examiner, but the latter in his report stated that said money was not in the safe and that the cash was short. In explaining why this money was not in the safe, he said that it was destined to pay wages on the previous Saturday, but that as all the laborers had not appeared to collect their wages he kept it in his desk, and it remained there because he had begun to prepare his report for the ten-day period.

Section 2 of Act No. 1740 provides that — "Any failure or inability of such person to produce all the funds and property properly in his charge on the demand of any officer authorized to examine or inspect such person, office, treasury, or depositary shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence that such missing funds or property have been put to personal uses or used for personal ends by such person within the meaning of the previous section."cralaw virtua1aw library

If, according to the officer who made the examination of the accounts, at the very moment when the shortage of P53 was discovered and the treasurer was notified he at once presented the money, no prima facie evidence of the crime of misappropriation can be established, nor any proof whatever that there was such misappropriation.

Therefore, the judgment appealed from is hereby reversed with the costs of both instances de oficio. So ordered.

Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Moreland, and Elliott, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Page 142, supra.




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






February-1910 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 5155 February 2, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. GABRIEL DIAZ

    015 Phil 123

  • G.R. No. 5312 February 2, 1910 - ENRIQUE MENDIOLA v. SIMEON A. VILLA

    015 Phil 131

  • G.R. No. 5160 February 3, 1910 - ENRIQUE F. SOMES v. RAFAEL MOLINA Y SALVADOR

    015 Phil 133

  • G.R. No. 5623 February 3, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE FELICIANO

    015 Phil 142

  • G.R. No. 5624 February 3, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO FELICIANO

    015 Phil 144

  • G.R. No. 4150 February 10, 1910 - FELIX DE LOS SANTOS v. AGUSTINA JARRA

    015 Phil 147

  • G.R. No. 5025 February 10, 1910 - JOSE T. PATERNO v. CATALINA SOLIS

    015 Phil 153

  • G.R. No. 5097 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATE v. PEDRO EDUARDO

    015 Phil 161

  • G.R. No. 5188 February 10, 1910 - LINO ALINDOGAN v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    015 Phil 168

  • G.R. No. 5197 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. VICENTE GENATO

    015 Phil 170

  • G.R. No. 5337 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MACARIO SAGUN

    015 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 5390 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MIGUEL M.A DE TORO

    015 Phil 181

  • G.R. No. 5565 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. ALEXANDER McCORMICK

    015 Phil 185

  • G.R. No. 5588 February 10, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO BUGARIN

    015 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. 5412 February 12, 1910 - ANGEL ORTIZ v. RAMON GARCIA

    015 Phil 192

  • G.R. No. 5418 February 12, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. CECILIO TANEDO

    015 Phil 196

  • G.R. No. 3983 February 15, 1910 - SALVADOR OCAMPO v. TOMAS CABAÑGIS

    015 Phil 626

  • G.R. No. 4950 February 15, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIO ALCANTARA

    015 Phil 202

  • G.R. No. 5219 February 15, 1910 - JOSE McMICKING v. PEDRO MARTINEZ

    015 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. 5566 February 15, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. BLAS MORO

    015 Phil 206

  • G.R. No. 5593 February 15, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX LARIOSA

    015 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 3821 February 16, 1910 - LUCIA PEREZ v. DOMINGO CORTES

    015 Phil 211

  • G.R. No. 5193 February 16, 1910 - FERNANDO FERRER v. DOROTEA DIAZ

    015 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. 5252 February 16, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO MALIGALIG

    015 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 5266 February 16, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. TORIBIO ABANTO

    015 Phil 223

  • G.R. No. 5516 February 16, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO SAMEA

    015 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 4320 February 10, 1910 - FRANCISCA PALET Y DE YEBRA v. ALDECOA & CO.

    015 Phil 232

  • G.R. No. 5168 February 19, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. NICOMEDES MORALES

    015 Phil 236

  • G.R. No. 5496 February 19, 1910 - MERCEDES MARTINEZ Y FERNANDEZ v. HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORP.

    015 Phil 252

  • G.R. No. 5161 February 21, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MIKE BEECHAM

    015 Phil 272

  • G.R. No. 5577 February 21, 1910 - J. W. MEYERS v. WILLIAM THEIN

    015 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. 5359 February 23, 1910 - JOSE COJUANGCO v. MANUEL RODRIGUEZ

    015 Phil 311

  • G.R. No. 5439 February 23, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. PONCIANO SALAZAR

    015 Phil 315

  • G.R. No. 5162 February 26, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. MIKE BEECHAM

    015 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 5319 February 26, 1910 - UNITED STATES v. SABAS BAOIT

    015 Phil 338

  • G.R. No. 5478 February 26, 1910 - SERAFIN BELARMINO v. MIGUEL BAQUIZAL

    015 Phil 341

  • G.R. No. 5461 February 28, 1910 - PETRONILO DEL ROSARIO v. VICENTE QUIOGUE

    015 Phil 345