G.R. No. 1468 : March 14, 1904
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. ALONSO P. GARDNER, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On January 20, 1903, an information was filed charging Alonso P. Gardner and two others with the crime of falsification of documents equivalent to current money. The charge alleged that on or about January 16, 1903, they forged two United States silver certificates by altering two genuine $1 certificates to appear as $10 certificates, with intent to circulate them. The case was later dismissed against Gardner’s co-accused, and the prosecution proceeded solely against him. The evidence established that Gardner, using mucilage and a blue pencil, altered a genuine $1 silver certificate by pasting the number “10” on it. He then gave this altered certificate to his associate, James Jameson, who successfully exchanged it with a Chinese merchant, Ah Fun, for 25 pesos under the representation that it was a genuine $10 bill. Gardner attempted to pass another similarly altered bill through another associate, William F. Kilp, but the attempt was discovered and failed.

ISSUE:
Whether the defendant, Alonso P. Gardner, is guilty of the crime of falsification of bank notes or documents payable to bearer under Article 289 of the Penal Code, or of counterfeiting money under Article 282, for altering genuine $1 silver certificates to make them appear as $10 certificates.

RULING:
The Supreme Court acquitted Gardner of the crime charged (falsification under Article 289) and of counterfeiting money under Article 282. The Court ruled that the altered certificates did not constitute a falsification of documents payable to bearer under Article 289, as that provision contemplates the complete fabrication or imitation of such instruments, not the mere alteration of a genuine one. Furthermore, the act did not constitute counterfeiting under Article 282 because there was no attempt to imitate or make a similitude of a genuine $10 silver certificate; the alteration was a clumsy trick that bore no real resemblance to an authentic $10 bill. The Court held that Gardner’s actions constituted the crime of estafa (swindling) under Article 534 of the Penal Code, as he defrauded Ah Fun by means of deceit, delivering an altered $1 bill under the false pretense that it was a $10 bill. The case was remanded with directions to institute a complaint for estafa.