9/15/2016

G.R.No.34917

TodayisThursday,September15,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.34917September7,1931
THEPEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINEISLANDS,plaintiffappellee,
vs.
LUACHUandUYSETIENG,defendantsappellants.
GibbsandMcDonough,Gullas,LopezandTuao,H.AloandManuelG.Brionesforappellants.
AttorneyGeneralJaranillaforappellee.
VILLAREAL,J.:
The defendants Lua Chu and Uy Se Tieng appeal from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Cebu
convictingthemoftheillegalimportationofopium,andsentencingthemeachtofouryears'imprisonment,afine
of P10,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency not to exceed onethird of the principal penalty,
andtopaytheproportionalcosts.
Insupportoftheirappeal,theappellantsassignedthefollowingallegederrorsascommittedbythecourtbelowin
itsjudgmenttowit:
Thelowercourterred:
1.InrefusingtocompeltheHon.SecretaryofFinanceoftheInsularCollectorofCustomstoexhibitincourt
therecordoftheadministrativeinvestigationagainstJoaquinNatividad,collectorofcustomsofCebu,and
JuanSamson,supervisingcustomssecretserviceagentofCebu,bothofwhomhavesincebeendismissed
fromservice.
2.Inholdingitasafactthat"nodoubtmanytimesopiumconsignmentshavepassedthruthecustomhouse
withouttheknowledgeofthecustomssecretservice."
3.Inrejectingthedefendants'theorythatthesaidJuanSamsonindenouncingtheaccusedwasactuated
byadesiretoprotecthimselfandtoinjureexcollectorJoaquinNatividad,hisbitterenemy,whowaspartly
instrumentalinthedismissalofSamsonfromtheservice.
4. In finding that the conduct of Juan Samson, dismissed chief customs secret service agent of Cebu, is
abovereproachandutterlyirreconcilablewiththecorruptmotivesattributedtohimbytheaccused.
5.InpermittingJuanSamson,prosecutionstarwitness,toremaininthecourtroomwhileotherprosecution
witnessesweretestifying,despitethepreviousorderofthecourtexcludingtheGovernmentwitnessesfrom
thecourtroom,andinrefusingtoallowthedefensetoinquirefromInsularCollectorofCustomsAldanese
regardingtheofficialconductofJuanSamsonassupervisingcustomssecretserviceagentofCebu.
6.IngivingfullcredittothetestimonyofsaidJuanSamson.
7. In refusing to hold that Juan Samson induced the defendant Uy Se Tieng to order the opium from
Hongkong.
8. In accepting Exhibits E and E1 as the true and correct transcript of the conversation between Juan
SamsonandtheappellantUySeTieng.
9.InacceptingExhibitFasthetrueandcorrecttranscriptoftheconversationbetweenJuanSamsonand
theappellantLuaChu.
10.InfindingeachoftheappellantsUySeTiengandLuaChuguiltyofthecrimeofillegalimportationof
opium, and in sentencing each to suffer four years' imprisonment and to pay a fine of P10,000 and the
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1931/sep1931/gr_34917_1931.html

1/4

9/15/2016

G.R.No.34917

costs, despite the presumption of innocence which has not been overcome, despite the unlawful
inducement,despitetheinherentweaknessoftheevidencepresentedbytheprosecution,emanatingfrom
aspiritofrevengeandfromacontaminated,pollutedsource.
Thefollowingareuncontradictedfactsprovedbeyondareasonabledoubtatthetrial:
About the middle of the month of November, 1929, the accused Uy Se Tieng wrote to his correspondent in
Hongkongtosendhimashipmentofopium.
AboutNovember4,1929,afterthechiefofthecustomssecretserviceofCebu,JuanSamson,hadreturnedfrom
avacationinEurope,hecalleduponthethencollectorofcustomsforthePortofCebu,JoaquinNatividad,athis
office,andthelatter,afterashortconversation,askedhimhowmuchhistriphadcosthim.Whenthechiefofthe
secret service told him he had spent P2,500, the said collector of customs took from a drawer in his table, the
amountofP300,inpapermoney,andhandedittohim,saying:"Thisisforyou,andashipmentwillarriveshortly,
andyouwillsoonbeabletorecoupyourtravellingexpenses."JuanSamsontookthemoney,left,andputitinto
the safe in his office to be kept until he delivered it to the provincial treasurer of Cebu. A week later, Natividad
called Samson and told him that the shipment he had referred to consisted of opium, that it was not about to
arrive,andthattheownerwouldgotoSamson'shousetoseehim.ThatverynightUySeTiengwenttoSamson's
houseandtoldhimhehadcomebyorderofNatividadtotalktohimabouttheopium.Thesaidaccusedinformed
Samsonthattheopiumshipmentconsistedof3,000tins,andthathehadagreedtopayNatividadP6,000oraP2
a tin, and that the opium had been in Hongkong since the beginning of October awaiting a ship that would go
directtoCebu.
Atabout6o'clockintheafternoonofNovember22,1929,oneNamTailoadedonthesteamshipKolambugan,
whichtheNavieraFilipinaashippingcompanyinCebuhadhadbuiltinHongkong,38casesconsignedtoUy
Sehengandmarked"U.L.H."AboutthesamedateNatividadinformedSamsonthattheopiumhadalreadybeen
putonboardthesteamshipKolambugan,anditwasagreedbetweenthemthatSamsonwouldreceiveP2,000,
NatividadP2,000,andtheremainingP2,000wouldbedistributedamongcertainemployeesinthecustomhouse.
Meanwhile,UySeTiengcontinuedhisinterviewswithSamson.TowardstheendofNovember,Natividadinformed
the latter that the Kolambugan had returned to Hongkong on account of certain engine trouble, and remained
thereuntilDecember7th.Inviewofthis,theshipperseveraltimesattemptedtounloadtheshipment,buthewas
toldeachtimebythecaptain,whoneededthecargoforballast,thattheshipwasabouttosail,andthe30cases
remainedonboard.
TheKolambuganarrivedatCebuonthemorningofDecember14,1929.Whilehewasexaminingthemanifests,
Samsondetailedoneofhismentowatchtheship.AfterconferringwithNatividad,thelatterinstructedhimtodo
everything possible to have the cargo unloaded, and to require Uy Se Tieng to pay over the P6,000. On the
morning of November 16, 1929, Natividad told Samson that Uy Se Tieng already had the papers ready to
withdrawthecasesmarked"U.L.H."fromthecustomhouse.SamsonthentoldNatividaditwouldbebetterforUy
SeTiengtogotohishousetohaveatalkwithhim.UySeTiengwenttoSamson'shousethatnightandwastold
thathemustpayovertheP6,000beforetakingtheopiumoutofthecustomhouse.UySeTiengshowedSamson
the bill of lading and on leaving said: "I will tell the owner, and we see whether we can take the money to you
tomorrow."ThefollowingdaySamsoninformedColonelFranciscooftheConstabulary,ofallthathadtakenplace,
and the said colonel instructed the provincial commander, Captain Buenconsejo, to discuss the capture of the
opiumownerswithSamson.BuenconsejoandSamsonagreedtomeetatthelatter'shousethatsamenight.That
afternoon Samson went to the office of the provincial fiscal, reported the case to the fiscal, and asked for a
stenographertotakedowntheconversationhewouldhavewithUySeTiengthatnightinthepresenceofCaptain
Buenconsejo.Asthefiscaldidnothaveagoodstenographeravailable,SamsongotoneJumapao,ofthelawfirm
of Rodriguez & Zacarias, on the recommendation of the court stenographer. On the evening of December 17,
1929,asagreed,CaptainBuenconsejo,LieutenantFernandoandthestenographerwenttoSamson'shouseand
concealed themselves behind a curtain made of strips of wood which hung from the window overlooking the
entrancetothehouseonthegroundfloor.AssoonastheaccusedUySeTiengarrived,Samsonaskedhimifhe
hadbroughtthemoney.Herepliedthathehadnot,sayingthattheowneroftheopium,whowasLuaChu,was
afraidofhim.SamsonthenholdhimtotellLuaChunottobeafraid,andthathemightcometoSamson'shouse.
AfterpointingouttoUySeTiengabackdoorentranceintothegarden,heaskedhimwheretheopiumwas,and
UySeTiengansweredthatitwasinthecasesnumbered11to18,andthattherewere3,252tins.UySeTieng
returnedatabout10o'clockthatnightaccompaniedbyhiscodefendantLuaChu,whosaidhewasnotthesole
owneroftheopium,butthatamanfromManila,namedTan,andanotherinAmoywerealsoowners.Samson
thenaskedLuaChuwhenhewasgoingtogettheopium,andthelatteransweredthatUySeTiengwouldtake
chargeofthat.OnbeingaskedifhehadbroughttheP6,000,LuaChuanswered,no,butpromisedtodeliverit
when the opium was in Uy Se Tieng's warehouse. After this conversation, which was taken down in shorthand,
Samson took the accused Lua Chu aside and asked him: "I say, old fellow, why didn't you tell me about this
beforebringingtheopiumhere?"LuaChuanswered:"Impossible,siryouwerenothere,youwereinSpainon
vacation."OnbeingaskedbySamsonhowhehadcometobringintheopium,LuaChuanswered:"Iwasina
cockpit one Sunday when the collector called me aside and said there was good business, because opium
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1931/sep1931/gr_34917_1931.html

2/4

9/15/2016

G.R.No.34917

brought a good price, and he needed money." All this conversation was overheard by Captain Buenconsejo. It
wasthenagreedthatUySeTiengshouldtakethepaperswithhimat10o'clocknextmorning.Attheappointed
hour,UySeTiengandoneUyAyarrivedatSamson'shouse,andasUySeTiengwashandingcertainpapers
over to his companion, Uy Ay, Captain Buenconsejo, who had been hiding, appeared and arrested the two
Chinamen, taking the aforementioned papers, which consisted of bills of lading (Exhibits B and B1), and in
invoicewritteninChinesecharacters,andrelatingtothearticlesdescribedinExhibitB.AfterhavingtakenUySe
Tieng and Uy Ay to the Constabulary headquarters, and notified the fiscal, Captain Buenconsejo and Samson
wenttoLuaChu'shometosearchitandarresthim.Inthepocketofacoathangingonawall,whichLuaChusaid
belonged to him, they found five letters written in Chinese characters relating to the opium (Exhibits G to K).
Captain Buenconsejo and Samson also took Lua Chu to the Constabulary headquarters, and then went to the
customhousetoexaminethecasesmarked"U.L.H."InthecasesmarkedNos.11to18,theyfound3,252opium
tinshiddenawayinaquantitytodryfish.ThevalueoftheopiumconfiscatedamountedtoP50,000.
IntheafternoonofDecember18,1929,CaptainBuenconsejoapproachedLuaChuandaskedhimtotellthetruth
as to who was the owner of the opium. Lua Chu answered as follows: "Captain, it is useless to ask me any
questions, for I am not going to answer to them. The only thing I will say is that whoever the owner of this
contraband may be, he is not such a fool as to bring it in here without the knowledge of those " pointing
towardsthecustomhouse.
The defense attempted to show that after Juan Samson had obtained a loan of P200 from Uy Se Tieng, he
inducedhimtoordertheopiumfromHongkongsayingthatitonlycostfromP2toP3atinthere,whileinCebuit
costfromP18toP20,andthathecouldmakeagooddealofmoneybybringinginashipmentofthatdrugthat
SamsontoldUySeTieng,furthermore,thattherewouldbenodanger,becauseheandthecollectorofcustoms
wouldprotecthimthatUySeTiengwenttoseeNatividad,whotoldhimhehadnoobjection,ifSamsonagreed
thatUySeTiengthenwrotetohiscorrespondentinHongkongtoforwardtheopiumthatafterhehadorderedit,
SamsonwenttoUySeTieng'sstore,inthenameofNatividad,anddemandedthepaymentofP6,000thatUySe
TiengthenwrotetohisHongkongcorrespondentcancellingtheorder,butthelatteransweredthattheopiumhad
alreadybeenloadedandthecaptainoftheKolambuganrefusedtolethimunloaditthatwhentheopiumarrived,
SamsoninsisteduponthepaymentoftheP6,000thatasUySeTiengdidnothavethatamount,hewenttoLua
ChuonthenightofDecember14th,andproposedthatheparticipatethatatfirstLuaChuwasunwillingtoaccept
UySeTieng'sproposition,buthefinallyagreedtopayP6,000whentheopiumhadpassedthecustomhousethat
LuaChuwenttoSamson'shouseonthenightofDecember17th,becauseSamsonatlastagreedtodeliverthe
opiumwithoutfirstreceivingtheP6,000,providedLuaChupersonallypromisedtopayhimthatamount.
Theappellantsmaketenassignmentsoferrorascommittedbythetrialcourtinitsjudgment.Somerefertothe
refusalofthetrialjudgetopermitthepresentationofcertaindocumentaryevidence,andtotheexclusionofJuan
Samson, the principal witness for the Government, from the court room during the hearing others refer to the
admissionoftheallegedstatementsoftheaccusedtakeninshorthandandtheotherstothesufficiencyofthe
evidenceoftheprosecutiontoestablishtheguiltofthedefendantsbeyondareasonabledoubt.
With respect to the presentation of the record of the administrative proceedings against Joaquin Natividad,
collector of customs of Cebu, and Juan Samson, supervising customs secret service agent of Cebu, who were
dismissed from the service, the trial court did not err in not permitting it, for, whatever the result of those
proceedings,theycannotservetoimpeachthewitnessJuanSamson,foritisnotoneofthemeansprescribedin
section342oftheCodeofCivilProceduretothatend.
With regard to the trial judge's refusal to order the exclusion of Juan Samson, the principal witness of the
Government,fromthecourtroomduringthehearing,itiswithinthepowerofsaidjudgetodosoornot,andit
doesnotappearthathehasabusedhisdiscretion(16CorpusJuris,842).
Neitherdidthetrialjudgeerrwhenheadmittedinevidencethetranscriptofstenographicnotesofthedefendants'
statements, since they contain admissions made by themselves, and the person who took them in shorthand
attestedatthetrialthattheywerefaithfullytakendown.Besidesthecontentsarecorroboratedbyunimpeached
witnesseswhoheardthestatements.
Astowhethertheprobatoryfactsaresufficienttoestablishthefactsallegedintheinformation,wefindthatthe
testimonygivenbythewitnessesfortheprosecutionshouldbebelieved,becausetheofficersoftheConstabulary
andthechiefofthecustomssecretservice,whogaveit,onlydidtheirduty.Asidefromthis,thedefendantsdonot
denytheirparticipationintheillegalimportationoftheopium,thoughtheaccusedLuaChupretendsthathewas
onlyaguarantortosecurethepaymentofthegratuitywhichtheformercollectorofcustoms,JoaquinNatividad,
hadaskedofhimforJuanSamsonandcertaincustomsemployees.Thisassertion,however,iscontradictedby
hisownstatementmadetoJuanSamsonandoverheardbyCaptainBuenconsejo,thathewasoneoftheowners
oftheopiumthathadbeenunlawfullyimported.
Butthedefendants'principaldefenseisthattheywereinducedbyJuanSamsontoimporttheopiuminquestion.
JuanSamsondeniesthis,andhisconductinconnectionwiththeintroductionoftheprohibiteddrugintotheport
ofCebu,bearshimout.Apublicofficialwhoinducesapersontocommitacrimeforpurposesofgain,doesnot
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1931/sep1931/gr_34917_1931.html

3/4

9/15/2016

G.R.No.34917

takethestepsnecessarytoseizetheinstrumentsofthecrimeandtoarresttheoffender,beforehavingobtained
theprofithehadinmind.ItistruethatJuanSamsonsmoothedthewayfortheintroductionoftheprohibiteddrug,
but that was after the accused had already planned its importation and ordered said drug, leaving only its
introductionintothecountrythroughtheCebucustomhousetobemanaged,andhedidnotdosotohelpthem
carrytheirplantoasuccessfulissue,butrathertoassuretheseizureoftheimporteddrugandthearrestofthe
smugglers.
Thedoctrinesreferringtotheentrapmentofoffendersandinstigationtocommitcrime,aslaiddownbythecourts
oftheUnitedStates,aresummarizedin16CorpusJuris,page88,section57,asfollows:
ENTRAPMENTANDINSTIGATION.Whileithasbeensaidthatthepracticeofentrappingpersonsinto
crime for the purpose of instituting criminal prosecutions is to be deplored, and while instigation, as
distinguishedfrommereentrapment,hasoftenbeencondemnedandhassometimesbeenheldtoprevent
the act from being criminal or punishable, the general rule is that it is no defense to the perpetrator of a
crimethatfacilitatesforitscommissionwerepurposelyplacedinhisway,orthatthecriminalactwasdone
atthe"decoysolicitation"ofpersonsseekingtoexposethecriminal,orthatdetectivesfeigningcomplicityin
theactwerepresentandapparentlyassistinginitscommission.Especiallyisthistrueinthatclassofcases
wheretheoffenseisoneofakindhabituallycommitted,andthesolicitationmerelyfurnishesevidenceofa
courseofconduct.Meredeceptionbythedetectivewillnotshielddefendant,iftheoffensewascommitted
byhimfreefromtheinfluenceortheinstigationofthedetective.Thefactthatanagentofanowneractsas
supposedconfederateofathiefisnodefensetothelatterinaprosecutionforlarceny,providedtheoriginal
design was formed independently of such agent and where a person approached by the thief as his
confederatenotifiestheownerorthepublicauthorities,and,beingauthorizedbythemtodoso,assiststhe
thiefincarryingouttheplan,thelarcenyisneverthelesscommitted.Itisgenerallyheldthatitisnodefense
toaprosecutionforanillegalsaleofliquorthatthepurchasewasmadebya"spotter,"detective,orhired
informerbuttherearecasesholdingthecontrary.
As we have seen, Juan Samson neither induced nor instigated the herein defendantsappellants to import the
opiuminquestion,asthelattercontend,butpretendedtohaveanunderstandingwiththecollectorofcustoms,
Joaquin Natividad who had promised them that he would remove all the difficulties in the way of their
enterprise so far as the customhouse was concerned not to gain the P2,000 intended for him out of the
transaction,butinorderthebettertoassuretheseizureoftheprohibiteddrugandthearrestofthesurreptitious
importers. There is certainly nothing immoral in this or against the public good which should prevent the
Government from prosecuting and punishing the culprits, for this is not a case where an innocent person is
inducedtocommitacrimemerelytoprosecutehim,butitsimplyatrapsettocatchacriminal.
Wherefore, we are of opinion and so hold, that the mere fact that the chief of the customs secret service
pretendedtoagreeaplanforsmugglingillegallyimportedopiumthroughthecustomhouse,inorderthebetterto
assuretheseizureofsaidopiumandthearrestofitsimporters,isnobartotheprosecutionandconvictionofthe
latter.
Byvirtuewhereof,findingnoerrorinthejudgmentappealedfrom,thesameisherebyaffirmed,withcostsagainst
theappellants.Soordered.
Avancea,C.J.,Johnson,Street,Malcolm,Villamor,Romualdez,andImperial,JJ.,concur.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1931/sep1931/gr_34917_1931.html

4/4