Fermin Mariano, for Appellant.
Attorney-General Villamor for Appellee.
MAPA, J. :
TOPIC: OPIUM LAW; IGNORANCE OF LAW. — Ignorance of the existence of the prohibitory provisions of the Opium Law is no excuse for the unlawful possession of opium.
FACTS:
1. On 30 October 1907, the prosecution proved and the accused, Que-quenco, admitted that opium was in his possession. Que-quenco is a registered user of opium before Act 1761, a law prohibiting its usage was passed.
2. The law was enacted on 10 October 1907 and took effect on 17 October 1907. Opium was found in the accused's possession 13 days after Act 1761's effectivity.
3. The accused pleaded ignorance of the said passage and stated that the municipal treasurer of Oroquieta didn't inform him of the impending effectivity of said law upon issuing his license on 22 October 1907.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the accused can use ignorance as a defense for prohibited usage of opium.
RULING:
NO. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith. The law took effect in accordance with Article 2 of the Civil Code and it had been 13 days in effect on the day it was discovered in his possession. Furthermore, the municipal treasurer categorically negated his statement that he wasn't informed. Aside from these, the existence of prohibition was already known in Oroquieta since it had been 20 days since its passage. Thus, the accused cannot use ignorance as a defense for his violation. The judgment appealed was affirmed with costs against the accused.
Comments
Post a Comment