G.R. No. L-132; March 28, 1946
EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PABLO CELIS, Defendant-Appellant.

FACTS

The case involves an appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila, which convicted the accused, Pablo Celis, of qualified theft. He was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of not less than four months and one day of arresto mayor nor more than four years, two months, and one day of prision correccional, and to pay the costs of the suit. According to the prosecution’s evidence, Sergeant Charles Sutton, while returning from inspecting Medical Depot No. 1 in the Manila port area under his charge, encountered the accused, who was then working as a laborer at the site. Sutton noticed the accused appeared somewhat excited. Becoming suspicious of the accused’s conduct, Sutton searched his person and found three sphygmomanometers (medical instruments) belonging to the United States Army hidden under his shirt. The trial court estimated the value of these instruments at P200. The accused admitted having possession of the three sphygmomanometers on the date and at the place in question but denied having stolen them, claiming he had found them by chance in a pile of garbage at the site where he worked, around the Medical Depot in the Manila port area. The trial court found this explanation insufficient for his exoneration.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused of qualified theft instead of simple theft.

RULING

The Supreme Court found no reason to disturb the trial court’s findings on the credibility of the evidence, as nothing in the record justified a different conclusion. Sergeant Sutton testified that when he found the accused with the medical instruments hidden under his jacket, the accused spontaneously admitted having taken them from the warehouse where he worked. Sutton also stated there was no pile of garbage near the place where he apprehended the accused. The Court noted additional circumstances: the accused displayed suspicious nervousness in front of Sergeant Sutton, and if the finding of the instruments had been innocent as he alleged, there was no reason for him to hide them under his jacket. Furthermore, it seemed strange that the sphygmomanometers, apparently new and in excellent condition, would have been thrown into a pile of garbage.
However, the Supreme Court agreed with the defense counsel and the Solicitor General that the trial court erred in convicting the accused of qualified theft. The mere circumstance that the accused worked as a laborer at the place where the theft was committed could not, in the Court’s judgment, create that relationship of trust and domestic intimacy which, according to the law, determines the crime of qualified theft (citing United States vs. Claravall, 31 Phil. 685, and People vs. Koc Song, 63 Phil. 394). Therefore, the crime committed is simple theft, for which the Penal Code prescribes a lesser penalty.
Adopting the recommendation made by the Solicitor General in his brief under the provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Supreme Court modified the appealed judgment. The appellant was sentenced to suffer a penalty of not less than two months of arresto mayor and not more than one year, seven months, and eleven days of prision correccional. The sentence was affirmed in all other respects.