G.R. No. L-1366, November 18, 1903
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. GABRIEL FUSTER, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
Gabriel Fuster was convicted in the trial court of the crime of usurpation under Article 521 of the Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of 2,500 pesetas. The prosecution’s evidence solely established that the land in question was in the possession of Doña Carolina Gomez de la Serna and others at the time of Fuster’s alleged forcible entry. The possessors did not claim ownership of the land; Doña Carolina herself testified that the land “does not belong to anybody” and that she merely occupied it by possession. The defense offered to present authentic documents to prove that Fuster was the lawful owner of the land, but the trial court rejected this evidence.

ISSUE:
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the defendant of usurpation despite the prosecution’s failure to prove that the land was owned by another, which is an essential element of the crime.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and acquitted the defendant. The crime of usurpation under Article 521 of the Penal Code requires that the real property or real right taken must be the property of another. The prosecution’s evidence only pertained to possession, not ownership, and even the alleged injured parties did not claim ownership. The trial court committed a reversible error in excluding the defendant’s evidence of ownership, as ownership is a necessary element to determine guilt. Furthermore, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish every element of the crime, including that the property belongs to another. Having failed to prove this essential fact, the defendant is entitled to an acquittal based on the presumption of innocence. The judgment was reversed, and the defendant was acquitted, with costs de oficio.