G.R. No. 6668 - People vs. Laserna

The trial involved the theft of a cow, with separate prosecutions for Fausto Briones and Estanislao Carrido in the Court of First Instance of Tayabas.
Both cases were set for a hearing scheduled on November 15, 1910, at 9 o’clock in the morning.

On the morning of November 15, 1910, at about 8:30, Jose Laserna, acting as a protector of defendant Carrido, went to the Tayabas jail.
Laserna called Fausto Briones to the jail and gave him P10.
He instructed Briones to assume the criminal responsibility for the theft by testifying that the animal was not stolen by Estanislao Carrido—whom Briones had identified during the preliminary investigation—but rather implicated another person called Estanislao, whom he did not know.
Laserna’s purpose was to secure the acquittal of Estanislao Carrido, his protege, by invalidating or retracting Briones’ prior testimony implicating Carrido.

Despite receiving P10 from Laserna and being propositioned to change his previous testimony, Fausto Briones testified in the hearing exactly as he had in the preliminary investigation.
Briones maintained that the animal had been delivered to him by Estanislao Carrido.
He clarified that although he had received the money from Laserna, he did not promise to recant or alter his original evidence against Carrido.

On November 26, 1910, the provincial fiscal filed a complaint charging Laserna with the crime of subornation of perjury.
The Court of First Instance of Tayabas subsequently rendered judgment on December 5, condemning Laserna to:

Three months’ imprisonment.
Payment of a fine of P50 (with twenty days’ subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency).
Disqualification from holding public office and from testifying in courts for two years, with an equivalent period for the disqualification from testifying in cases where he was not a party.

The costs of the prosecution were assessed against Laserna, and the P10 given to Briones was ordered to be confiscated.

Whether the act of subornation of perjury is complete and punishable even if the intended crime (perjury) was not actually committed by the witness.

Does the inducement itself, where a person is persuaded to commit perjury, constitute a separate punishable offense under the law?
Can a person be held criminally liable for merely proposing or attempting to induce another to commit perjury if the latter ultimately remains truthful?