Scribd
Upload
324 views1 page

People vs. Sia Teb Ban: Qualified Theft Case

SiaTeb Ban was found guilty of qualified theft after taking a watch without the owner's consent. He was apprehended shortly after by a friend of the offended party, who discovered the stolen watch. The defendant appealed the municipal court and court of first instance's ruling, claiming he was not guilty. However, the court found no merit in the appeal and affirmed the judgment, modifying only the accessory penalties imposed in accordance with the law. The court held that criminal acts are presumed voluntary unless shown otherwise, and the appellant's deliberate acts raised a conclusive presumption of criminal intent in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Uploaded by

Degard
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
324 views1 page

People vs. Sia Teb Ban: Qualified Theft Case

SiaTeb Ban was found guilty of qualified theft after taking a watch without the owner's consent. He was apprehended shortly after by a friend of the offended party, who discovered the stolen watch. The defendant appealed the municipal court and court of first instance's ruling, claiming he was not guilty. However, the court found no merit in the appeal and affirmed the judgment, modifying only the accessory penalties imposed in accordance with the law. The court held that criminal acts are presumed voluntary unless shown otherwise, and the appellant's deliberate acts raised a conclusive presumption of criminal intent in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Uploaded by

Degard
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Crim Law #22

Title: People vs. SiaTeb Ban


G.R. No. L-31695
November 26, 1929

Nature of actions: An appeal from the judgment of the Municipal Court of Manila and the Court
of First Instance.

Facts: SiaTeb Ban took a watch without the owner's consent;it was then overtaken a few
moments later by a friend of the offended party, who found the stolen watch on the
appellant. He is found guilty of qualified theft and habitual delinquency, the defendant
was sentenced by the municipal court of Manila and on appeal, by the Court of First
Instance of this City, to two years, four months, and one day presidio correccional, with
costs, and to the additional penalty of twenty-one years' imprisonment.

Defendant contends that he is not guilty of the crime.

Issue: Whether or not animus lucrandi(intention to make a gain) has been proved.

Held: The Court found no merit of the defendants appeal and that the law provides for the
imposition of accessory penalties, the appealed judgment is modified, the appellant
being sentenced to the accessory penalties provided in article 58 of the Penal Code, the
said judgment being affirmed in all other respects, with costs against the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi:The fundamental doctrine of law that the act penalized by the law is presumed
to be voluntary unless contrary is shown. The appellant's felonious acts, freely and
deliberately executed, the moral and legal presumption of a criminal and injurious intent
arises conclusively and indisputably, in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

You might also like