G.R. No. L-47721; April 30, 1941
EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS, querellante y apelado, vs. TEODORO RULL Y OTRO, acusados. TEODORO RULL, apelante.

FACTS

The accused-appellant Teodoro Rull, a magician or prestidigitator, was a compadre of spouses Elpidio Javellana and Salvacion T. Javellana for five years. In November 1937, Rull met Salvacion and expressed a desire to help the spouses with their misfortunes. On December 4, 1937, Rull visited the Javellanas’ office and announced he was ready to assist. The following day, at Rull’s house, he examined the palm of Salvacion’s son and proposed a remedy involving sacrifices and prayers over seven Tuesdays and thirteen Fridays, requiring a fund of money. He assured Salvacion she would recover all the money after the sacrifices.
Starting on December 7, 1937, and on multiple subsequent dates (December 14, 17, 21, 28, 31; January 4, 11, 14, 1938; and February 2, 1938), Salvacion, accompanied by her maid Anastacia Cansancio, delivered various sums of money to Rull (totaling P1,600) at his house, her house, and the Catholic cemetery of Iloilo. Elaborate ceremonies were performed each time involving prayers, candles, holy water, and placing the money in an envelope inside a box or bag, with instructions to keep it secret. On the final occasion, February 4, 1938, at the cemetery, after similar ceremonies, Rull ordered the bag containing the box with all the money to be hung on the cemetery gate. A commotion ensued where Rull feigned a fit, and the bag disappeared. Salvacion reported the incident to the secret police, who investigated and found the bag buried under Rull’s house. Rull’s servant retrieved it in the presence of a police officer, and Rull confessed to obtaining the money through the described prayers and ceremonies to appropriate it for himself.
The Court of First Instance of Iloilo found Rull guilty of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced him accordingly. Rull appealed, not contesting his guilt but arguing that the trial court erred in convicting him under Article 315, and insisting he should only be liable for the less serious offense defined in the second paragraph of Article 318 of the same Code.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellant Teodoro Rull is guilty of the crime of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code, or merely of the lesser offense of swindling under the second paragraph of Article 318 of the same Code.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, holding that Rull is guilty of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code. The Court rejected the defense’s argument that the swindle fell under Article 318 because the means employed—superstitious beliefs and pretended supernatural powers—involved unrealizable or impossible influences. The Court cited its consistent jurisprudence in the Philippines (U.S. vs. De los Reyes, 34 Phil. 733; U.S. vs. Molina, 38 Phil. 794; People vs. Daluz, R.G. No. 29532; People vs. Swame, 34 Off. Gaz., 1955; People vs. Eden, R.G. No. 37147) that similar acts of defrauding individuals by abusing their credulity and superstition constitute estafa under Article 315. The Court distinguished the Spanish Supreme Court decisions cited by the defense, noting that Philippine jurisprudence has consistently ruled otherwise. The penalty imposed by the trial court was deemed in accordance with law. The appealed judgment was confirmed, with costs against the appellant.