GR L 2120; (December, 1905) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-2120
FACTS:
Simplicio Leyson, a clerk in the Manila assessor and collector’s office, was charged with falsification of a public document as a public official. The information alleged that on or about January 15, 1904, he willfully counterfeited the signature of J.Y. McCartey, the chief of division, on an industrial tax receipt (Exhibit A) and presented it to a taxpayer, Si Cho, after receiving payment. During the trial, it was proven that Leyson had access to blank receipts, personally collected the tax money, and delivered the receipt bearing the forged signature. Additional receipts (Exhibits B, C, D, and E) with the same forged signature were also presented. The lower court found him guilty as a private individual of falsifying a public document, sentencing him to seven years of presidio mayor.
ISSUE:
1. Whether the defendant, Simplicio Leyson, was a public official at the time of the commission of the crime.
2. Whether his act of signing J.Y. McCartey’s name on the tax receipt constituted falsification of a public document.
RULING:
1. Yes, the defendant was a public official. The Supreme Court held that under Article 401 of the Penal Code, a public official includes any person who takes part in the exercise of public functions by appointment of competent authority. As a duly appointed clerk performing public duties in a government bureau, Leyson qualified as a public functionary, contrary to the lower court’s finding.
2. Yes, the defendant committed falsification of a public document. The Court found that there was a manifest attempt by Leyson to imitate the genuine signature of J.Y. McCartey, as evidenced by a comparison between the forged signature on Exhibit A and McCartey’s authentic signature (Exhibit F). This satisfied the element of counterfeiting under the law. The industrial tax receipt was deemed a public document.
The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s judgment. It found Leyson guilty of falsification of a public document as a public official, as charged. He was sentenced to twelve years and one day of cadena temporal, a fine of 1,250 pesetas, and costs.