Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5790) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In The People of the Philippines vs. Pablo de la Cruz, G.R. No. L-5790, decided on April 17, 1953 by Justice Bengzon, the accused operated a retail store in Sampaloc, Manila. On the morning of October 14, 1950, Eduardo Bernardo Jr. entered the store and purchased a six-ounce tin of Carnation milk for thirty centavos, which exceeded by ten centavos the maximum price of twenty centavos fixed under Executive Order No. 331, issued pursuant to Republic Act No. 509. The sale was made on behalf of Ruperto Austria, who was then out of favor with De la Cruz, prompting a complaint to the City Fiscal. At the trial in the Court of First Instance of Manila, De la Cruz was convicted of selling above the ceiling price, sentenced to five years’ imprisonment, fined five thousand pesos plus costs, and barred from wholesale and retail trade for five years.Issues:
- Was the criminal charge against Pablo de la Cruz fabricated?
- Is the penalty of five years’ imprisonment and a five thousand-peso fi
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5790) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Charge
- Plaintiff-Appellee: The People of the Philippines.
- Defendant-Appellant: Pablo de la Cruz, a retail store owner in Sampaloc, Manila.
- Offense: Selling a six-ounce tin of “Carnation” milk at 30 centavos, exceeding the 20-centavo ceiling price fixed by Executive Order No. 331 under Republic Act No. 509.
- Transaction and Prosecution
- On October 14, 1950, Eduardo Bernardo, Jr. purchased the milk for Ruperto Austria, who had personal differences with the appellant.
- The sale was reported to the City Fiscal’s Office, resulting in criminal prosecution for violation of price-control regulations.
- Trial Court Proceedings and Appeal Grounds
- Trial Court Sentence: Five years’ imprisonment, a fine of ₱5,000 plus costs, and a five-year bar from wholesale and retail business.
- Appellant’s Contentions on Appeal:
- The charge was fabricated.
- The punishment was wholly disproportionate and unconstitutional.
- Republic Act No. 509 prescribed excessive penalties in violation of the Constitution.
Issues:
- Fabrication of Charge
- Whether the trial court erred in declining to find that the charge was fabricated.
- Disproportionality and Constitutionality of Punishment
- Whether the imposed imprisonment and fine were grossly disproportionate to the offense and thus unconstitutional.
- Validity of Penal Provisions in Republic Act No. 509
- Whether the statutory penalties under Section 12 of RA 509 (imprisonment of 2 months to 12 years, fine of ₱2,000 to ₱10,000, and business bar) are excessive and unconstitutional.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)