G.R. No. 307: September 12, 1902
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. AGUSTIN VILLANUEVA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On November 25, 1884, Celestino Borlasa filed a complaint against Agustin Villanueva. Villanueva, accompanied by Juan Urna, went to Borlasa’s house and, after inspecting it, claimed to be acting under the orders of forestry officer Hermenegildo de Ocampo. Villanueva observed that the house was built with new lumber and demanded the sum of 6 pesos and 2 reals from Borlasa. He stated this payment was to avoid a fine and to prepare a petition for a free permit to cut timber. Borlasa could not pay the full amount and offered 3 pesos instead, which Villanueva refused to accept. The incident was witnessed by two credible individuals.

ISSUE:
Whether the defendant, Agustin Villanueva, is guilty of the crime of attempted estafa (fraud).

RULING:
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court finding Agustin Villanueva guilty of attempted estafa. The Court held that Villanueva’s actions constituted an attempt to obtain money through fraudulent means, specifically by falsely representing that he was authorized by a forestry officer to collect payment to avoid a fine and secure a permit. The estafa was not consummated only because the complainant could not pay the full demanded amount and Villanueva refused the partial payment offered.

The Court found the aggravating circumstance of recidivism under Article 10(18) of the Penal Code, as Villanueva had three prior final convictions for estafa. No mitigating circumstances were present to offset this. Consequently, the penalty was imposed in its maximum degree. However, considering the defendant’s financial condition, the fine was not made heavy. Villanueva was sentenced to pay a fine of 500 pesetas, with subsidiary imprisonment not exceeding one month and one day in case of insolvency, and to pay one-third of the costs. The preventive imprisonment he had already suffered was to be credited.