G.R. No. L-17021, U.S. v. Dominguez
Republic of the Philippines
EN BANC DECISION
February 23, 1921
G.R. No. L-17021
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,
ISAAC DOMINGUEZ, defendant-appellant.
Pablo, Guzman & Lucero for appellant.
Attorney-General Feria for appellee.
Villamor (Ignacio), J.:
The fact which gave rise to the present appeal is described in the information as follows:
That on or about 19th day of January, 1920, in the city of Manila, Philippine Islands, the said accused who was a salesman at the Philippine Education Co., Inc. did then and there receive the sum of seven pesos and fifty centavos (pesos 750) from one Lamberto Garcia as payment for five copies of Sam’s “Practical Business Letters” bought from the store of the said company, which amount should have been turned over and delivered by him (accused) to the company’s cashier or his authorized representative therein; that instead of delivering the said amount to the said cashier or his representative therein, which he knew it was his obligation to do, the said accused did then and there willfully, unlawfully and criminally misappropriate and convert it to his own personal use to the damage and prejudice of the said Philippine Education Co., Inc. in the sum of seven pesos and fifty centavos (pesos 7.50) equivalent to 37 Ã‚Â½ pesetas.
At the close of the trial the court found the accused guilty of the crime of estafa of the sum of pesos 7.50 and sentenced him to be imprisoned for two months and one day of arresto mayor, with the accessories provided by law, and costs.
Appeal having been taken to this to this Supreme Court, the counsel for the accused assigns, as error committed by the court, its finding that the accused is guilty of the crime charged and its action in imposing upon him the penalty corresponding to a principal in the crime of estafa.
It is proved that the accused, as salesman of the bookstore “Philippine Education Co., Inc.” sold on the morning of January 19, 1920, five copies of Sams’ “Practical Business Letters,” of the value of seven pesos and fifty centavos (pesos 7.50), which the accused should have immediately delivered to the cashier but which he did not deliver, until after it was discovered that he had sold the books and received their value without delivering it to the cashier, as was his duty.
The accused alleges that he did not deliver the money immediately after the sale, because the cash boys were very busy as well as the cashier, while he had to go to the toilet for some necessity, and upon coming out, the cashier caught him by the arm and asked him for the money, and then he delivered the sum of pesos 7.50 to him; and that it was not his intention to make use of said money. Such claim, nevertheless, does not exempt him from the criminal responsibility which he had incurred, for the evidence before us shows clearly that he attempted to defraud the “Philippine Education Co., Inc.” Upon being asked for the money, he first said that a woman, whom he did not know, bought books, without having paid, for the reason that she was, according to herself, in a hurry; and, latter, he went out of the store to talk to a friend who was employed in the Pacific Mail Steamship Co. to tell him that if anyone should ask him if he (the employee of the Pacific Mail Steamship Co.) bought books that morning in the store of the “Philippine Education Company” he should answer affirmatively. Furthermore, he had also declared to the manager of the bookstore that he used part of the money in purchasing postage stamps.
There can be no doubt as to the injury which the accused would have caused to the interests of the company in retaining for himself the proceeds of the sale in question. ·
But the question of law to be decided is whether the fact that the accused retained in his possession the proceeds of the sale, delivering them to the cashier only after the deceit had been discovered,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document