THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. SEVERO DE LOS REYES, TELESFORO ALCANTARA, AND FLORENCIO GABAYAN, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

United States versus De los Reyes

The Case

This is a criminal prosecution for estafa, the crime of swindling, brought by the Government of the United States against Severo de los Reyes, Telesforo Alcantara, and Florencio Gabayan. The charge is that the three accused, by fraud and with intent to deprive the complainant of his property, took a carabao from him in exchange for a worthless piece of paper which they represented to be an instrument that would make and coin money. The case matters to the reviewee for two reasons. First, it illustrates the elements of estafa by false pretenses or deceit, where the victim is induced to part with his property by the fraudulent representations of the accused. Second, it shows how the Supreme Court treats a pure question of fact on appeal, and how it weighs the credibility of a simple, unlettered complainant against the testimony of the accused.

Procedural History

The accused were charged before the trial court with the crime of estafa. They were duly tried, convicted, and each sentenced to six months of arresto mayor, with each to pay one-third of the costs. Because the complainant had recovered his carabao, the trial court awarded no indemnity. The accused appealed the judgment of conviction to the Supreme Court. On appeal, they raised only a question of fact, and their sole argument rested on the evidence in the case.

Facts

In the month of December 1914, the accused approached the complainant, Paleyan, and induced him to part with his carabao, an animal of the value of seventy-seven pesos. In exchange, they delivered to him a piece of paper and persuaded him to accept it as payment. They represented and guaranteed that the paper was an instrument which would make and coin paper and silver money after the lapse of seven Fridays, provided that on each of those Fridays Paleyan would offer appropriate prayers for the success of the enterprise.

Paleyan believed in the efficacy of the paper because of the representations of the accused, and so he parted with his carabao. He followed their instructions to the letter, offering the prayers on each of the seven Fridays. As would naturally be expected, the paper produced no money at all. The result was the loss of his carabao without any return of any kind.

Finally convinced that he had been swindled, Paleyan laid an information before the authorities for the arrest and prosecution of the swindlers. At the trial, the carabao was found in the possession of one of the accused, who offered an explanation for his possession but failed to convince the trial court of his innocence. The trial court convicted all three accused, and they appealed.

Issues

• Whether or not the accused are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa by falsely representing to the complainant that a piece of paper would make and coin money, thereby inducing him to part with his carabao.
• Whether or not the findings of fact of the trial court, particularly on the credibility of the complainant and the accused, should be sustained on appeal.

Applicable Provisions

The decision does not quote any specific article of the Penal Code. It applies the general concept of estafa as charged, namely, that the accused fraudulently and with intent to deprive the complainant of his property obtained the carabao from him by means of a piece of paper which they induced him to accept as payment upon their false representation and guaranty. The information as recited in the decision states the charge in these terms:

That, in the month of December, 1914, they, fraudulently and with intent to deprive the complainant of his property, obtained from him a carabao of the value of seventy-seven pesos by means of a piece of paper which the accused delivered to him at the time and induced him to accept as payment for his carabao upon their representation and guaranty that it was an instrument which would make and coin paper and silver money after the lapse of seven Fridays, provided the complainant, upon each of said Fridays, would offer appropriate prayers for the success of the enterprise.

This recital supplies the very acts of deceit and the intent to deprive which constitute the crime charged, and it is the standard against which the evidence was measured.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the accused are guilty as charged and as found by the trial court. The Court declared that the proof of their guilt is evident in every line of the testimony. It characterized the case as one in which men of intelligence and knowledge of the world took advantage of the ignorance and lack of experience of the complainant for the purpose of depriving him of his property. The story told by the victim was straightforward and direct and carried with it conviction. The Court noted the character of the story, the wealth of detail, the tints of local coloring, and the ingenious method employed to play upon the credulity of the victim, and it was satisfied of the truth of his testimony. It observed that the victim was too ignorant and dense to have conceived so unique a method of vengeance against the accused.

On the second issue, the Court sustained the findings of the trial court. The carabao was found in the possession of one of the accused, who offered an explanation of his possession but failed to convince the trial court, as he likewise failed to convince the Supreme Court, of his innocence. The only question raised was one of fact, and the Court found no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that the accused are guilty as charged and found by the trial court.

Doctrine

Estafa by false pretenses or deceit is committed when the accused, acting fraudulently and with intent to deprive the victim of his property, obtains that property by means of false representations or a fraudulent device which induces the victim to part with it. The deceit must be the efficient cause of the delivery of the property, as when the complainant here parted with his carabao because he believed in the efficacy of the paper produced by the false representations of the accused. The intent to deprive is shown by the false guaranty that the worthless paper would produce money, coupled with the actual loss of the property without any return. On appeal, findings of fact of the trial court, especially those turning on the credibility of witnesses, will not be disturbed where the evidence supports them, and the Supreme Court will affirm a conviction where the proof of guilt is clear in the testimony.

Disposition

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of conviction appealed from, with costs against the appellants.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that estafa by deceit is complete when false representations, made with intent to deprive, induce the victim to part with his property, and the Supreme Court will sustain the trial court's findings of fact where the proof of guilt is evident in every line of the testimony. Examiners like to use this case to test the elements of estafa by false pretenses and the rule that factual findings and credibility determinations of the trial court are accorded respect on appeal.