People v.

Balmores 1950
Defendant Rafael Balmores, accused of attempted estafa through falsification of a security
Crime details:
o September 22, 1947 in Manila: tore off at the bottom in a crosswise direction a
portion of a genuine 1/8 unit Philippine Charity Sweepstakes ticket thereby
removing the true and real unidentified number, substituting and writing in ink at
the bottom on the left side of the ticket the figure 074000, the winning number in
the June 29, 1947 draw for P359.55
o Failed to perform all acts of execution that would have produced the crime of estafa
through falsification of a security as a consequence by reason of some causes other
than his spontaneous desistance
o Employee Bayani Miller discovered that ticket was falsified, so he called for a
policeman who apprehended Balmores
o Sentenced to 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 12 years and 1 day of reclusion
temporal P100 plus costs
Arguments of Balmores: no genuine 1/8 unit for that draw; issued only four units for
each ticket; information does not show that the ticket did not really have the winning
number; no falsification because 074000 was the true and real number of ticket
Courts responses:
o If theres no genuine 1/8 unit for that draw, then the ticket was spurious
o If it had the winning number, there would have been no need to tear off the bottom
Recklessness and clumsiness of falsification did not make the crime impossible under Par.
2, Art 4 in relation to Art. 59 of the RPC
o Court could not say that it would have been impossible to commit the crime had the
clerk to whom the ticket was presented for payment had not exercised due care (so
even he hadnt exercised due care, theres still a chance of completing the crime)
Art. 166 imposes penalty for falsification of treasury or bank notes or certificates or other
obligations and securities
o Complex crime of attempted estafa through falsification of an obligation or security
of the Philippines, hence penalty to be imposed in maximum period; but theres a
mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction, and via the Indeterminate Sentence
Law, minimum cannot be lower than prision mayor in its maximum period
o TCs penalty is correct