Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5887)
Facts:
In The United States v. Look Chaw, decided on December 16, 1910, the respondent, Look Chaw (alias Luk Chiu), was prosecuted in the Court of First Instance of Cebu for the unlawful possession of opium. On August 19, 1909, revenue and customs officers, led by Chief Jacks and Agent Milliron, searched the British steamship *Erroll* at Cebu’s wharf and discovered two sacks (Exhibits A and B) containing 49 cans and 80 cans of opium, respectively, in areas under the respondent’s control. Look Chaw voluntarily admitted ownership of both sacks and confessed he had purchased the opium in Hong Kong intending to sell it as contraband in Mexico. Four additional cans (Exhibit C) were found in the firemen’s quarters under the ship’s internal-revenue regulations, and one can (Exhibit D) was purchased by a secret agent as evidence of a sale. The defense demurred, arguing the original complaint improperly charged both possession and sale; the court sustained the demurrer, and the sale charge wasCase Digest (G.R. No. L-5887)
Facts:
- Proceedings in the Court of First Instance of Cebu
- Original complaint alleged defendant “carried, kept, possessed and had in his possession and control, 96 kilogrammes of opium” and that he was “surprised in the act of selling ₱1,000 worth of prepared opium.”
- Defendant demurred on grounds that two distinct crimes were charged (possession and sale); court sustained the demurrer, directed separate complaints, and this action concerns only unlawful possession.
- Trial court findings of fact
- Search of steamship Erroll (Aug. 18, 1909) by port and internal-revenue officers:
- Exhibit A: one sack in a cabin near the saloon containing 49 cans of opium.
- Exhibit B: one larger sack in the hold under defendant’s control, containing additional cans of opium.
- Defendant freely admitted ownership of both sacks, purchase in Hong Kong for intended sale as contraband in Mexico or Veracruz, and employment of two other Chinese seamen to conceal Exhibit A.
- Additional exhibits:
- Exhibit C: four cans found in firemen’s quarters, which crew may retain under Manila Custom-House instructions if not taken ashore.
- Exhibit D: one can purchased by a secret-service agent to demonstrate defendant’s intent to sell; portions of evidence referring to a sale were stricken as beyond possession charge.
- Defendant’s statements, in presence of fiscal, interpreter, jail warden and guards: purchase prices (₱3 and ₱5 per can), intent to sell at ₱16 per can, contract to sell about ₱500 worth, total cans 129, and use of associates to avoid repeated searches.
- Vessel details: S.S. Erroll of English nationality, voyage from Hong Kong via Manila and Cebu to Mexico.
- Defense motions: dismissal for lack of jurisdiction and for absence of a criminal offense; rejected by trial court.
- Sentence imposed: five years’ imprisonment, ₱10,000 fine, subsidiary imprisonment if insolvent (not exceeding one-third of main penalty), costs, confiscation of exhibits, and custody for immigration enforcement pending appeal or service of sentence.
- Supreme Court proceedings
- Appeal (G.R. No. 5887) heard by the Supreme Court on defendant’s allegations and evidence record.
- Findings on appeal: possession aboard a foreign vessel in transit generally not triable locally, but landing contraband on Philippine soil constitutes violation of local penal law and confers jurisdiction on territorial courts.
Issues:
- Did the original complaint improperly charge more than one offense?
- Does mere possession of opium aboard a foreign vessel in port constitute a crime triable by Philippine courts?
- Did the Court of First Instance have jurisdiction over the possession offense when the vessels were of foreign nationality?
- Was the imposition of maximum penalty for unlawful possession warranted by the facts?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)