You are on page 1of 2

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-12661 August 25, 1917

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ZACARIAS


TEGRADO,Defendant-Appellant.

Antonio M. Jimenez for appellant.


Acting Attorney-General Feria for appellee.

MALCOLM, J.:

A colt valued at P34 was stolen from Valeriano Blanca. It was


subsequently found in the possession of Agapito Partolan. The latter
testified that he bought the animal from Zacarias Tegrado, the
accused. The accused, however, claimed that the colt was raised
from a mare belonging to him and then sold to Partolan.
Identification of the colt to determine if its mother was a mare
belonging to the complainant Valeriano Blana or if its mother was a
mare belonging to the accused Zacarias Tegrado is, therefore, the
determining factor.chanro blesvi rt ualawlib ra ry chan robles v irt ual law li bra ry

The colt was identified by a number of witnesses as the property of


Blanca. Other witnesses testified to having seen the colt following a
mare belonging to the accused. Whom shall we believe? We could,
of course, rest our conclusion on the findings of the trial court. We
could, in addition, point out grave discripancies in the testimony of
the witnesses for the defense, which argues against its reliability.
But there was present as in interested, spectator, another
witnesses, who, without being sworn, could tell the truth and
nothing but the truth. This was the colt. The colt was separated
from the mare of the complaining witness and turned loose; it at
once went back to this mare. The colt was then taken to the mare
of the accused; but showed its dislike for the mare and tried to find
the mare of the complaining witness. Another colt was placed near
the mare of the complaining witness; thereupon the mare and that
colt both resisted. This was a practical demonstration worthy of a
Solomon by which the colt was able to testify by manifesting all the
signs of the young, whether human or not, on finding a long lost
mother. (U. S. vs.Caralipio and Fernando [1911], 18 Phil. Rep.,
421.) chanrobles v irt ual law l ibra ry

If we are to accept the evidence of the prosecution as true, then we


must conclude that the defendant stole the colt. The presumption of
stolen property prima facie proof of guilt, would work against the
accused. (U. S. vs. Soriano [1907], 9 Phil. Rep., 445; U. S. vs.
Lopez [1914], 25 Phil. Rep., 589) We are convinced that the
defendant is guilty as charged. chanroble svirtualawl ibra ry chan rob les vi rtual law lib rary

The lower court found that the accused had previously been
convicted of the same crime. The court thereupon in view of the
value of the colt, P34, which would bring the facts within the
provisions of paragraph 3 of article 518 of the Penal Code, in view
of article 520 of the same Code as amended which would raise the
penalty to the one next higher in degree, and in view of the fact
that the accused was a recidivist which would raise the penalty to
the maximum, sentenced the accused to four years two months and
one day of presidio correccional, to the accessories of the law, and
to pay the cost. This judgment is affirmed with the addition of an
order to return the property stolen to its owner if not already done,
or to reimburse the owner in the amount of P34, or to suffer
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, with the costs of this
instance. So ordered. chan roblesv irt ualawli bra ry chan robles v irt ual law l ibra ry

Arellano, C.J., Johnson, Carson, Araullo and Street, JJ., concur.

You might also like