G.R. No. 182734 - Ocampo vs. Arroyo

On or about August 1, 1911, in the municipality of Iloilo, Philippine Islands, a charge was brought against five individuals for violating Act No. 1757.
The accused were Cayetano Rafael, Perseveranda Lopez, Victor Discipulo, Victoriano Rafael, and Guillermo Juanesa.
The complaint alleged that these individuals intentionally, maliciously, and criminally participated in playing the prohibited game of monte for money.

During the trial, the charge against Cayetano Rafael was dismissed due to insufficient evidence linking him to the crime.

The remaining four defendants—Perseveranda Lopez, Victor Discipulo, Victoriano Rafael, and Guillermo Juanesa—were found guilty by Judge James S. Powell.

Each of these four received a sentence imposing a fine of P300.
In addition, each was ordered to pay one-fifth of the costs, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.

Only two of the convicted defendants, Perseveranda Lopez and Victoriano Rafael, appealed the decision.
The appellants raised four assignments of error:

Error in admitting certain exhibits presented by the fiscal—specifically, objects such as tally-sheets and lead pencils alleged to have been used in playing monte.
Error in overruling the defense’s motion to annex the official record of the justice of the peace regarding the declarations made by the witnesses during the preliminary investigation.
Error in sentencing the accused to a fine of P300 each, claimed as excessive.
Error in the factual finding that the accused had played monte with bets of money in the house of Cayetano Rafael, thus rendering them guilty of the crime charged.

The prosecutor introduced exhibits (tally-sheets, lead pencils, etc.) believed to be used in connection with the game of monte.

It was noted that if these items were properly identified as instruments used in the game, they could be admissible as corroborative evidence.
However, the lower court’s decision was primarily based on eyewitness testimony that the defendants were caught in the act of gambling.
The paraphernalia did not serve as independent evidence but only as potential corroboration of the eyewitness accounts.

The record from the preliminary investigation, taken before a justice of the peace, was not automatically part of the trial record and could only be referred to for testing witness credibility.

Act No. 1757 provided that any person violating the prohibition against "playing at and conducting" the game of monte would be subject to punishment.

Section 3 prescribed a fine ranging from not less than P10 to not more than P500, or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

Section 7 of Act No. 1757 made clear that the act of playing monte alone, whether or not money was involved, was prohibited.

Whether the admission of paraphernalia (tally-sheets, lead pencils, etc.) as evidence was correct, given that their use in the game had not been conclusively demonstrated.
Whether their presence alongside eyewitness testimony constituted an error that prejudiced the case against the defendants.

Whether it was erroneous to overrule the defense’s motion seeking to annex the official record of the justice of the peace’s declarations from the preliminary investigation.
Consideration of the role such records play in a trial de novo in the Court of First Instance.

Whether imposing a fine of P300 on each defendant was excessive under the provisions of Act No. 1757.
Whether the sentencing aligned with the statutory range provided by the law.

Whether the finding that the defendants played the prohibited game of monte “with bets of money” was a necessary element of the crime.
Whether the factual record supports the conclusion of their guilt based solely on their participation in the game, independent of the monetary element.