Case Summary (G.R. No. L-18)
Key Dates
- April 30, 1945: The information charging Vizconde with qualified theft was filed in the Municipal Court of Manila.
- May 25, 1945: Vizconde was convicted and sentenced by the Municipal Court.
- June 21, 1945: A hearing was held where testimony was taken.
Applicable Law
The proceedings were governed by the Revised Penal Code relevant to the period and the rules stipulated in the legal framework in effect at that time.
Factual Background
On April 28, 1945, Vizconde was arrested by Alipio Orias, a private in the U.S. Army, for carrying a bundle wrapped in paper containing a khaki shirt and two undershirts belonging to the government. Orias did not inquire about the provenance of the items. The accused claimed that he picked them up from a toilet room where they were publicly visible and intended to turn them over to military police. Nardo, the officer who received Vizconde, failed to conduct a thorough investigation regarding the ownership of the items or the circumstances surrounding their recovery.
Prosecution's Evidence
The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimonies of Orias and Nardo. However, both witnesses failed to definitively identify Vizconde and lacked specific knowledge about the ownership of the items. Their testimonies indicated that they had merely arrested him on sight without sufficient evidence establishing that the goods were stolen or that Vizconde had the intent to permanently deprive any owner of their property.
Defense's Position
The defendant, Vizconde, testified that he discovered the items in a corner of the toilet room and maintained his intention to return them to the authorities. He clearly refuted any claim of theft, stating that the shoes he wore were given to him during his time as a guerilla fighter. His statements went uncontradicted by the prosecution, underscoring that there were no indicators of his intent to unlawfully possess the items.
Judicial Findings
The court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the elements necessary to prove the crime of qualified theft. The intent to commit theft, characterized by the absence of the animus fruendi, animus lucrandi, and animus furandi, was not present. The retrieved items, lacking a discernible owner or evidence of being stolen, were in Vizconde's possession without criminal intent.
Procedural Issues
The case raised a procedural concern regarding the delayed transmission of records from the Municipal Court to the Court of First Instance,
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-18)
Case Background
- The appellant, Rosendo Vizconde y Santos, was charged with the crime of qualified theft of personal property valued at P15.20.
- The information regarding the charge was filed in the Municipal Court of Manila on April 30, 1945.
- On May 25, 1945, the Municipal Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to six months and one day of imprisonment, along with the obligation to pay costs.
- The appellant appealed the conviction to the Court of First Instance of Manila, which upheld the conviction but reduced the penalty to two months and one day of arresto mayor.
Trial Proceedings
- Testimonies were presented by the prosecution and the defense. Alipio Orias and Lucero Nardo testified for the prosecution, while the accused, Vizconde, provided his own testimony.
- Alipio Orias, a Private in the U.S. Army, testified about the arrest of the appellant on April 28, 1945, noting that the appellant was carrying a khaki shirt, two undershirts, and a pair of shoes valued at P15.20.
- Orias could not identify the appellant during the trial, citing the time that had elapsed since the arrest.
- Lucero Nardo, who was in charge of the Military Police, stated that he asked the appellant where he obtained the articles and the appellant claimed he had "picked them up," but no further investig