G.R. No. L-12855, December 21, 1917

FACTS:
On December 23, 1915, a complaint was filed against Roque Dato and Severo Lustre for the crime of malversation of public funds. The complaint alleged that on or about October 23, 1915, Floro Basada, the bonded postmaster of Carangian, Bobon, Samar, criminally withdrew and misappropriated public funds and properties (cash of P4,028.01, postage stamps worth P161.66, and a safe box valued at P50) under his care. The accused, Roque Dato and Severo Lustre, were charged with directly assisting Basada in the withdrawal and misappropriation, carrying away the safe box, appropriating the cash, and throwing the box into the sea. The complaint was later dismissed against Severo Lustre so he could testify for the prosecution. After trial, the court found Roque Dato guilty and sentenced him to five years of imprisonment and payment of costs. Dato appealed, arguing that the evidence did not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that, as a private person not charged with custody of public funds, he could not be guilty of malversation.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that Roque Dato committed the crime of malversation.
2. Whether a private person, not a public officer, can be held liable as a principal for the crime of malversation of public funds.

RULING:
1. Yes, the evidence sufficiently established Dato’s guilt. The trial court’s findings of fact, based on the evidence, showed that Dato, a mature, influential, and strong-willed resident of Carangian, learned that Postmaster Floro Basada (a young man of weak character) had custody of a large sum of public money. Dato induced Basada to join in a scheme to steal the funds. On the night of October 23, 1915, Dato, with the aid of Severo Lustre, entered the post office, cut the wire securing the safe box (which Basada had left open per their plan), withdrew the cash amounting to P4,000, appropriated it, and had Lustre throw the safe box into the sea. These facts proved Dato’s direct participation in the crime beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Yes, a private person can be held liable as a principal for the crime of malversation. The Supreme Court, citing United States vs. Ponte (20 Phil. Rep., 379), held that those who take a direct part in or cooperate in the commission of malversation by public officials are guilty as principals, even if they are not public officers themselves. Dato not only took a direct and active part in the crime but also induced others to commit it, making him a principal under Article 13 of the Penal Code.

The Court modified the trial court’s sentence. In addition to five years of imprisonment, Dato was ordered to pay a fine of P4,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and was forever disqualified from holding any public office or employment in the Philippines, as mandatorily required by Section 3 of Act No. 1740. The judgment was affirmed with these modifications.

This is AI (Gemini and Deepseek) Generated. Please Double Check. Powered by Armztrong.