7/25/2019 People vs. Isla
1/3
Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-17692 December 8, 1921
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNES SL!NDS,plaintiff-appellee,vs.EUGENO
". SL!,defendant-appellant.
Crispin Oben for appellant.Acting Attorney-General Tuason for
appellee.
#OHNSON, J.:
The only question pesented by this appeal is !hethe the
appellant is "uilty of the ci#e of$estafa by #eans of falsification
of a #ecantile docu#ent.$ punishable unde aticle %&' in
elation!ith aticle %&& of the Penal Code, as a#ended by Act
No. ()'(, o of the ci#e of estafa,punishable unde paa"aph ( of
aticle *%+ in elation !ith paa"aph ' of aticle *%* of the
PenalCode.
The lo!e cout, upon the evidence pesented duin" the tial of the
cause, eached the conclusionthat the defendant !as "uilty of the
ci#e of estafa by #eans of falsification of a #ecantiledocu#ent,
punishable unde aticle %&' in elation !ith aticle %&&
of the Penal Code as a#ended by
Act No. ()'(, in elation !ith paa"aph ' of aticle *%* of sa#e
Code, and sentenced hi# to be
i#pisoned fo a peiod of fou yeas, t!o #onths and one day
ofprision correccional !ith theaccessoy penalties pescibed by la!,
to inde#nify the offended paty in the su# of P+, to pay afine of
P*&, and, in case of insolvency, to suffe subsidiay i#pison#ent
in accodance !ith thepovisions of the la!. o# that sentence the
defendant appealed to this cout.
The facts ae not disputed. The defendant pesented no poof to
efute the facts cha"ed in theco#plaint and poved duin" the tial.
The co#plaint alle"ed 1awphil.net
That bet!een the ')th and '/th of ebuay, '/(', o about said
peiod, in the city of Manila,Philippine 0slands, the said accused,
!ith intent to pe1udice and defaud the fi# of 2o 3ecoand Co., of
the said city of Manila, did then and thee !ilfully, ille"ally and
feloniously falsifyand #ecantile docu#ent, to !it a chec4 No.
'+'//(-B da!n on the Philippine National
Ban4 fo the su# of P+, Philippine cuency, #a4in" it to appea
that one Abdon 5aconPaadeo !as a paty to said chec4 !hile in fact
he !as not, by fo"in", si#ulatin" andi#itatin" the si"natue of said
Abdon 5acon Paadeo, so that the docu#ent, falsified asafoesaid,
appeas da!n and pepaed as follo!s
$No. '+'//(-B
$P6030PP0NE NAT07NA3 BAN8
7/25/2019 People vs. Isla
3/3
The doctine announced in those decisions, ho!eve, has been
so#e!hat #odified, if not evo4ed,by late decisions in the cases of
nited tates !s.Ba"a 9'( Phil., (&(:? and nitedtates !s.Cinco
and Redoa, p. %/, post, especially in a case !hee the alle"ed fo"ey
ofalsification !as #ade !ith efeence to a #ecantile docu#ent. 0n
the case of nitedtates !s.Ba"a, as !ell as in that of nited tates
!s.Cinco and Redoa, supa, the defendant!as held "uilty of the
falsification of a #ecantile docu#ent, even thou"h thee !as no
atte#pt to
i#itate o si#ulate the si"natue of the peson !hose na#e !as
ille"ally used, fo the eason that ineffectin" the tansaction in
those cases the defendant #ade it to appea falsely that the alle"ed
patyto the docu#ent !as a eal paty theeto !hen, as a #atte of fact,
he did not paticipate in any#anne !hateve in the tansaction. The
doctine announced by those t!o decisions is in ha#ony!ith the
decisions of the supe#e cout of pain. 9"eedecisions of the supe#e
cout of pain ofNove#be (+, '(? Danuay (+, '%? Danuay %', '+? Apil
(', '/)? Danuay ', '/&? andebuay ', '/'.:
ollo!in" the doctine announced in the t!o cases #entioned 9. .
!s.Ba"a, and . . !s.Cincoand Redoa,supra:, !e ae of the opinion and
so decide that the appellant is "uilty of the ci#eof
estafaco##itted by #eans of the falsification of a pivate co##ecial
docu#ent, and he isheeby sentenced to be punished, in accodance,
!ith the povisions of aticle %&' of the PenalCode, as a#ended
by Act No. ()'(, !ith penalty ofprision correccionalin its
#a>i#u# de"ee, the#ini#u# of the #ediu# "ade of !hich is fou
yeas, nine #onths and eleven days, and a fine ofP*&, and
sentence of the lo!e cout is thus #odified, !ith costs. o
odeed.
Araullo, C.#., "treet, $alcol%, A!ance&a, 'illa%or, #ohns
an( )o%ual(e*, ##., concur.
