GR L 5791; (December, 1910) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-5791
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BERNARDO GREGORIO and EUSTAQUIO BALISTOY, defendants-appellants.
December 17, 1910
FACTS:
Pedro Salazar obtained a judgment against Eustaquio Balistoy for a sum of money. To execute the judgment, two rural properties belonging to Balistoy were attached and scheduled for sale. Bernardo Gregorio intervened, claiming ownership of one of the attached properties, asserting he had purchased it from Balistoy in 1905, prior to the filing of Salazar’s complaint. To support his claim, Gregorio presented a copy of a private document (Exhibit D) containing a memorandum dated February 22, 1905, which stated Balistoy sold the land to Gregorio.
The prosecution charged Balistoy and Gregorio with falsification of a private document. They alleged that Balistoy, with intent to injure his creditor Salazar and avoid the attachment, simulated the memorandum of sale by falsely pre-dating it to February 25, 1905, when it was actually written in April 1908. The Court of First Instance of Albay convicted both defendants. During the trial, only a copy of the alleged falsified memorandum was presented; the original document was never produced, nor was the copy verified against an original by any authorized officer or witnesses. Both defendants appealed their conviction.
ISSUE:
Was the crime of falsification of a private document sufficiently proven when only a copy of the alleged falsified document was presented, and the original was not produced in court?
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court ruled that in criminal proceedings for the falsification of a document, it is indispensable for the judges and courts to have the original document before them. This is necessary to ascertain whether the crime of falsification was indeed committed and to determine the extent of each defendant’s liability. The Court emphasized that it is improper to convict based solely on a copy of the alleged falsified document when the original is not presented. Although there may be doubts regarding the defendants’ innocence based on witness testimony, the absence of the original document meant there was no decisive and conclusive proof of their guilt as co-principals in the crime charged. Defendants in criminal cases are presumed innocent until their guilt is fully and satisfactorily proven; in cases of reasonable doubt, they are entitled to acquittal. Therefore, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the lower court and acquitted both Eustaquio Balistoy and Bernardo Gregorio.