G.R. No. L-25375 and 25376
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. VICENTE DE LEON Y FLORA

October 8, 1926 | VILLAMOR, J.

FACTS

Early in the morning of December 21, 1925, Vicente de Leon y Flora entered the yard of Vicente Magat’s house in Manila. Without violence, intimidation, or force, he took two game roosters with intent to gain. One rooster, valued at P8, belonged to Diego Magat, and the other, valued at P10, belonged to Ignacio Nicolas. The accused was prosecuted in the municipal court for two separate crimes of theft (one for each rooster). He initially pleaded guilty but later appealed to the Court of First Instance where he pleaded not guilty. The trial court, after a joint trial, found him guilty of only one crime of theft, considering the taking of both roosters as a single criminal act. The court also noted that the accused was a habitual delinquent. The accused appealed, contesting the sufficiency of evidence. The Attorney-General, however, argued that the taking of two roosters belonging to different owners constituted two distinct crimes of theft.

ISSUE

Whether the act of taking, on the same occasion and in the same place, two items of personal property belonging to two different owners constitutes one crime of theft or two separate crimes.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the act constitutes only one crime of theft. The Court affirmed the trial court’s finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt but modified the penalty.

The Court held that the crime of theft, as defined in Article 517 of the Penal Code, is an offense against property. The essence of the crime is the unlawful taking with intent to gain. When several articles are taken from the same place on a single occasion through a single, continuous criminal impulse or intent, it constitutes only one crime, regardless of the number of owners. The unity of the criminal intent and act prevails over the accidental circumstance that the stolen properties belonged to different persons.

The Court cited jurisprudence from the Supreme Court of Spain and various American jurisdictions supporting the principle that a single larcenous act taking multiple items stored in the same place results in one offense, even if the items have different owners.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The appealed judgment was modified. Accused Vicente de Leon y Flora was sentenced to suffer the penalty of six years and three months of *presidio mayor*, with the accessories of the law, and to pay the costs. The penalty was calculated by imposing the maximum degree of *presidio correccional* for the theft (due to the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity) and adding an additional penalty for habitual delinquency under Act No. 3062.