Art 171 Falsification by public officers, employee or notary or ecclesiastical minister

U.S v. Inosanto

A municipal president falsified an inscription in the register of births kept by, and under the charge of, the municipal secretary who issued a certified copy of such inscription Held: Not guilty under Art 171, the falsification committed by him was upon an act, certificate or instrument the issuance of which does not pertain to his office, it was without abuse of his office.

Documents may be simulated or fabricated People v Tupasi The falsification need not to be made on an official form. It is sufficient that the document is geven the appearance, or made similar to the official forsm

People v. David Simulation of public, mercantile document is falsification U.S v Corral Facts: To cause arrest of his common law wife who had left him and gone to Corregidor, taking with her a trunk and a diamond ring, the accused simulated a warrant of arrest by making it appear that the same was signed and issued by the authority when in truth it was not. The accused sent it to the municipal president of Corregidor and, by virtue thereof, the woman was arrested. When prosecuted for falsification of a public document, the accused contended that one can falsify only a genuine document and that what he falsified was no document at all. Held: It is not necessary that it be a real document, it is enough that it be given the appearance of a genuine document.

Par no. 1 of Art 171 U.S v Paraiso

The mere drawing up of a false document is not sufficient. The signature, handwriting of another person must be signed or made by the offender without authority to do so.

Requisites or Counterfeiting U.S v Rampas 1. that there be an intent to imitate or attempt to imitate 2. that the two signatures/handwriting, the genuine and forged, bear some resemblance to each other.

Imitating or feigning U.S v Angeles Drawing up an open will purporting to have been executed in March, 1901, by one Petra Mariano, and signed by Norberto Cajucom at her request and by attesting witness, when as a matter of fact she died on July 28, 1900, is falsification by feigning

U.S v Castro Facts: The accused is charged with falsification of a private document in that he signed the name of one Regino Sevilla, deceased, to a certain bill of sale of a boat or barangay, the property of the estate of the said Sevilla. The accused attached the signature of Regino to the document in question for the purpose of defrauding Sevillas heirs and depriving them of their property in the said boat. It does not appear, however that any attempt was made to simulate the genuine signature, and there is evidence of record that Sevilla himself did not know how to write or even t sign his own name. Held: No. Conviction could not be had unless it appears that an attempt has been made to simulate a genuine signature of that person, and therefore the accused cannot be convicted of the crime of falsification as charged in the information. He could also NOT be convicted under Par 2 of Art 171 since it could not be made to appear that the deceased participated in the execution of the document by signing it, since he did not know how to write.

Par 2 of Art 171 People v. Villanueva Facts: On December 7, 1931, there was sent from Hawaii a postal money order for the sum of P200 in favor of Irene Sanchez. On January 14, 1932, there were likewise sent from California five postal money

ordes, four of which were the sum of P200 eand and one for the sum of P100, in favor of Feliciano Isidro. The defendant postmaster signed two documents wherein he admitted having received the money orders, forged signature of Irene Sanchez and Feliciano Isidro thereon, collected and appropriated the respective amounts thereof. Held: Even if the signatures of Irene S. and Feliciano I. had not been imitated on the money orders, the fact they were signed thereon in order to make it appear that they have intervened in the execution thereof in the sense that they received the corresponding amount in question, is sufficient to constitute the crime of falsification of public document.

Emas v De Zuzuarregui The act of falsely impersonating the owner of a piece of land as vendor in the forged deed of sale would constitute an act of falsification under par 2 of Art 171, the offender being a private individual. People v Asa The placing of the accused of their thumb marks in the list of voters opposite the names of the electors who have not actually voted, thereby making it appear that those electors cast their votes when they did not in fact vote, is guilty under par 2 art 171 offenders being private individual.

Par 3 of Art 171 U.S v Capule Facts: Nicasio Capule, for the purpose of appropriating to himself a tract of contract land, without the knowledge of consent of the owners, by agreement with the notary pubic who later died, prepared a deed of sale, pretending that it was made by the owners, and they had sold the land for P550, and Eulogio Ortega and Doroteo Guia as the signers because the alleged vendors do not know how to do so. It appears that the owners did not sell it to Capulo but only conferred a power of attorney upon him because of absolute conficdence they had in him, so that he might represent them in a suit against Maximo Reyes. Held: The defendant performed acts constituting falsification, by counterfeiting, ascribed statements different from what they had made to hom and by perverting the truth in the narration of facts, and through deceit, making it appear they had signed a power of attorney, when in fact, it was a deed of sale.

Par 4 Art 171 People v. Yanza

Facts: The provincial fiscal filed an information charging the accused with falsification because in her certificate of candidacy for the position of councilor, she had willfully and unlawfully made false statement that she was eligible to the said office although she knew that she was under 23 years old making it narration of untruthful facts. Held: Not guilty. When the accused certified that she was eligible, she practically wrote a conclusion of law, art 171 punishes untruthful statements in a narration of facts. Had she stated that she was born on March 29, 1931, she wouldve been guilty since date was a matter of fact. She merely said she was eligible believing that the 23 year requirement could be adequately met if she reached 23 upon assuming councillorship. She made a mistake of judgment and no intention on her part to make a false statement.

Second Requisite- Legal obligation Ramirez v CA The promulgation of Central Bank Circular 133, abolishing the requirement of specific licensing under CB no. 20 wiped away the legal obligation of applicant of foreign exchange to disclose the truth of facts narrated in the documents supporting their application. As there no more legal obligation, an untruthful statement no longer constitute the crime of falsification. People v Quasha Facts: The accused was a lawyer who drafted the articles of incorporation of a public utility corporation. In preparing it, he made it appear that Baylon, his servant, was the owner of the shares of more than 60% subscribed capital stocks. The falsification imputed was that Baylon was a mere trustee or a dummy of his American co-incorporators. Held: Not guilty. The Constitution prohibits that granting of a franchise for the operation of a public utility already in existence without the requisite of proportion of Filipino capital. For the mere formation, such revelation was not essential and that the defendant was under no obligation to make it. People v. Poserio Facts: On June 1, 1951, the defendant was appointed patrolman of Manila Police Department. On July 30, 1951, he filed his Personal Data sheet. On question no. 10, it asked if the applicant had previously been convicted of a criminal offense, the defendant wrote, none. An investigation was later conducted, it was discovered that he had a previous conviction of theft. Held: Defendant acquitted. There was no law or ordinance imposing a legal obligation to reveal his previous conviction in filing the Personal Data sheet which member of the Police department are required to file.

U.S v Gonzaga Thus a municipal treasurer, who paid the specified amount in Bs voucher, presented C for payment, and later made statement that the money had been paid to B, not knowing that the signature of B was forged and therefore, municipal treasurer had no knowledge of the falsity of his statement in his account current, IS NOT liable for falsification by making untruthful statement in a narration of facts. U.S v Bayot The defendant was a janitor, marked with vertical lines in a payroll opposite the names of some persons under his charge, to show that said persons had performed their word, during days stated in the payroll and certified that the payroll was correct, WHEN as a matter of fact one of the men did his work only before 8 o clock in the morning but absented himself during the whole day and work as a cook in the house of the defendant during said persons IS NOT guilty since that although it was not for the whole day, the nature of the work can be finished before 8 in the morning. People v. Po Giok To The accused in buying a residence certificate, gave to the treasurer a false information as to his full name, length of residence in the Philippines, and occupation, for the purpose of establishing his true identity, committed falsification of narration of facts. U.S v San Jose No falsification if he acted in good faith in stating that the affiant was the owner of the banca which he had raised form the bottom of the estero by virtue if a contract with the municipality and that it remained unclaimed. U.S v Milla Facts: By means of threats and intimidation, A B and C succeeded in having D and E execute a deed of sale, it was stated that for and in consideration of certain money, D and E sold a parcel of land to A. Held: ABC not guilty since ones consent to a contract was obtained by means of violence does not make the facts narrated therein false. People v Dizon An assistant bookkeeper of the post exchange at For Stotsenberg who, having bought several articles in the post exchange for which he signed several chits, intentionally did not record in his personal account most of the said chits and destroyed them to avoid paying amount is GUILTY of falsification.

Par 5 People v Reodica and Cordero

The Municipal treasurer certified that he paid the salary of an employee on July 31, when in fact it was done on July 23 IS NOT guilty because at any rate the employee having been in fact paid is immaterial/ the employee was granted 8 days leave from July 23 to 31, and for the purpose of payment of salary, this amounted to his having rendered services during that period. People v Montano and Cabagsang The chief of police, conspiring with justice of peace, altered the dates in the police blotter, book of arrest and bail bond and return of warrant of arrest of S to show that S was arrested and gave bond on Sept 13, 1930 so that to avoid administrative charges against the justice of peace as he was to dispose the case of S during prelim inv, but failed to so IS guilty since the true date will show the delay in the prelim inv stage.

Par 6 People v Manansala The accused was arrested for having in his possession a falsified duplicate copy of a traffic violation report previously issued to him as temporary drivers permit. Alterations: In pending cases: he altered III and the word three and superimposed it to make it appear as I and One. The accused altered to avoid immediate arrest should he be caught committing a fourth traffic violation. Held: Guilty People v. Mateo The defendant was a priest of Aliaga, Nueva Ecijia, was called on in the performance of his duties to execute an affidavit. When asked to produce his personal cedula. It was observed that the figure 25 was changed to 25. It appeared that 25 was his real age. He was prosecuted for falsification Held: Not guilty, it was correction, not falsification. People v Romualdez Facts: On the composition of a bar candidate, the grades 73%-Civil Law and 64%-Remedial Law were written by an employee of the SC, after striking out the grade of 63% and 58%. Held: The acts of falsification are 1. Making alterations on genuine document, 2. Making it appear that correctors had participated in blotting out the grades and 3. Attributing to the correctors statements other than those made by them.