PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ABRAHAM SERANILLA Y PAPA, ELY SANCHEZ Y IBARRIENTOS and FRANK DE JOYA Y BORBON, respondents; G.R. No. L-54090 May 9, 1988

 

ACCUSED	CRIME	VERDICT	SENTENCE
ELY SANCHEZ ABRAHAM SERANILLA	QUALIFIED THEFT	GUILTY	LIFE IMPRISONMENT
FRANK DE JOYA	SIMPLE THEFT	GUILTY	12 YEARS of PRISION MAYOR as minimum to 20 YEARS of RECLUSION TEMPORAL as maximum

 

TOPIC: IMPOSSIBLE CRIME, factual and legal impossibility

 

FACTS:

1. Ely Sanchez was a cargo checker  and Abraham Seranilla was a manifest clerk, both working for the Philippine Air Lines (PAL) . As such, they have access to the Air Cargo Office at PAL.  They were  aided and abetted by their co-accused, Frank de Joya y to whom some of the said checks were delivered for encashment and/or negotiation.

2. The 3 accused, with intent to gain, take, steal, and carry away a cargo freight consisting of packages containing dollar checks of different denominations amounting to $127,450.51 , belonging to the First National City Bank, Manila and being sent by it via air freight of the Philippine Air Lines to the United States.

3. PAL Cargo Supervisor Halili wrote Katigbak, Manila Manager of the Emery Freight Corporation which handled the package, that it did not reach its destination. The packages of checks in question consigned to FNCB San Francisco was never received by the latter and their investigation showed that it was never loaded in the aircraft as per his letter.

4. The accused were then arrested and the dollar checks confiscated per mission order dated August 22, 1973 and the Arrest, Seize and Seizure Order, and their statements were taken.

5. The lower court’s found them guilty without reasonable doubt based on the prosecution's evidence, and the admission made by them in their respective statements which they executed after their arrest and the fact that bunches of the stolen checks in question were confiscated from accused De Joya and Seranilla without any satisfying explanation as to their possession of missing checks.

6. Thus, they appealed that their extrajudicial confessions were obtained through force and intimidation and thus, inadmissible. On the other hand, the accused De Joya and Sanchez alleged that there was no crime committed considering the prosecution’s finding that the checks were of no commercial value.

 

ISSUE:

W/N there was no crime committed considering the prosecution’s finding that the checks were of no commercial value.

RULING:

NO. Theft was committed despite the finding that the checks have no value.

Real or actual gain is not an element of theft. Intent to gain is, which is present in the case at bar.

If the check is funded, stealing the check and presenting it for payment with the bank is not impossible crime. Even if the accused failed to encash the same due to external cause such as apprehension by police or stop payment, they will still be held liable for consummated theft. In theft, taking property with intent to gain consummates the crime. Since actual gain is not an element thereof, failure to gain will not prevent the consummation of the crime.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.