THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. SIA TEB BAN (ALIAS JUAN TONINO, ALIAS JUAN ANTONIO, ALIAS PEDRO ANTONIO), DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

Found guilty of qualified theft and habitual delinquency, the
defendant was sentenced by the municipal court of Manila, and on
appeal, by the Court of First Instance of this City, to two years, four
months, and one day presidio correccional, with costs, and to the additional penalty of twenty-one years’ imprisonment.

He now contends that he is not guilty of the crime with which he is charged.

But it has been proved that he took the watch described in the
information without the owner’s consent, having been overtaken a few
moments later by a friend of the offended party, who found the stolen
Watch on the appellant. It is alleged that animus lucrandi has
not been proved. We find it sufficiently established, as the acts of
the accused (one’s intention may be gathered from one’s deeds)
unequivocally show.

It is a fundamental doctrine of law that the act penalized by the
law is presumed to be voluntary unless the contrary is shown (art. 1,
Penal Code). And from the appellant’s felonious acts, freely and
deliberately executed, the moral and legal presumption of a criminal
and injurious intent arises conclusively and indisputably, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary (sec. 334, No. 2, Act No. 190).

In view of the fact that we find no merit in this appeal and that
the law provides for the imposition of accessory penalties, the
appealed judgment is modified, the appellant being sentenced to the
accessory penalties provided in article 58 of the Penal Code, the said
judgment being affirmed in all other respects, with costs against the
appellant. So ordered.

Avanceña, C. J., Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Ostrand, and Johns, JJ., concur.