G.R. No. L-13785; October 8, 1918
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TOMAS ADIAO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
The defendant, Tomas Adiao, a customs inspector, was charged with the crime of theft. He was initially found guilty of the lesser crime of frustrated theft by the Municipal Court of Manila. On appeal to the Court of First Instance of Manila, he was again convicted of frustrated theft and sentenced to pay a fine. The evidence established that Adiao abstracted a leather belt valued at P0.80 from the baggage of a Japanese named T. Murakami and secreted it in his desk within the Custom House, where it was later discovered by other employees. The defendant argued on appeal that the evidence did not support a conviction for theft.

ISSUE:
Whether the acts committed by the defendant constitute consummated theft or merely frustrated theft.

RULING:
The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s judgment. It held that the crime committed was consummated theft, not frustrated theft. The Court ruled that the defendant performed all the acts of execution necessary for the crime of theft from the moment he took possession of the belt with intent to appropriate it. The fact that he was under observation and unable to remove the merchandise from the Custom House did not negate the consummation of the crime, as all essential elements of theft were present. The Court cited analogous decisions of the Supreme Court of Spain supporting the view that theft is consummated upon taking with intent to gain, regardless of subsequent recovery or prevention of full utilization.

The Court found the aggravating circumstance that the offender took advantage of his public position as a customs inspector. With one aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstances, the penalty was imposed in its maximum degree. Accordingly, the defendant was sentenced to three months and one day of arresto mayor. The belt was ordered returned to its lawful owner, T. Murakami.