Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 336 views

    13 Valenzuela Vs People, 525 SCRA 306

    Uploaded by

    Chello Miranda Balagso
    1) Aristotel Valenzuela was seen hauling and unloading cases of Tide detergent from a supermarket without a receipt. He and his co-accused Jovy Calderon then tried to load the boxes into a taxi. 2) When asked for a receipt, Valenzuela fled on foot but was apprehended. He was convicted of consummated theft. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that though Valenzuela did not freely dispose of the items, the elements of theft were present when he took the property without consent and with intent to gain.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    13 Valenzuela Vs People, 525 SCRA 306

    Uploaded by

    Chello Miranda Balagso
    336 views1 page
    1) Aristotel Valenzuela was seen hauling and unloading cases of Tide detergent from a supermarket without a receipt. He and his co-accused Jovy Calderon then tried to load the boxes into a taxi. 2) When asked for a receipt, Valenzuela fled on foot but was apprehended. He was convicted of consummated theft. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that though Valenzuela did not freely dispose of the items, the elements of theft were present when he took the property without consent and with intent to gain.

    Original Title

    13 Valenzuela vs People, 525 SCRA 306

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Aristotel Valenzuela was seen hauling and unloading cases of Tide detergent from a supermarket without a receipt. He and his co-accused Jovy Calderon then tried to load the boxes into a taxi. 2) When asked for a receipt, Valenzuela fled on foot but was apprehended. He was convicted of consummated theft. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that though Valenzuela did not freely dispose of the items, the elements of theft were present when he took the property without consent and with intent to gain.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    336 views1 page

    13 Valenzuela Vs People, 525 SCRA 306

    Uploaded by

    Chello Miranda Balagso
    1) Aristotel Valenzuela was seen hauling and unloading cases of Tide detergent from a supermarket without a receipt. He and his co-accused Jovy Calderon then tried to load the boxes into a taxi. 2) When asked for a receipt, Valenzuela fled on foot but was apprehended. He was convicted of consummated theft. 3) The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that though Valenzuela did not freely dispose of the items, the elements of theft were present when he took the property without consent and with intent to gain.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Aristotel Valenzuela y Natividad vs .

    People of the Philippines and Hon. Court of Appeals Nachura


    G.R. No. 160188 June 21, 2007

    Facts:
    While Lorenzo Lago, a security guard was manning his post at the open parking area of a Super Sale
    Club, he saw Aristotel Valenzuela , who was wearing an identification card with the mark "Receiving
    Dispatching Unit (RDU), hauling a push cart loaded with cases of Tide detergent and unloaded them
    where his co-accused, Jovy Calderon, was waiting. Valenzuela then returned inside the supermarket,
    and and after five minutes emerged with more cartons of detergent and unloaded it on the same area
    where he initially unloaded. Thereafter, Valenzuela hailed a taxi and together with Calderon started
    loading the boxes of detergent inside, and then Calderon boarded the vehicle.

    As the taxi was about to leave, Lago asked Valenzuela for the receipt of the boxes of detergents. The
    accused reacted by fleeing on foot, but were subsequently apprehended at the scene. The trial court
    convicted both Valenzuela and Calderon of the crime of consummated theft. Valenzuela appealed
    before the Court of Appeals, arguing that he should only be convicted of frustrated theft since he was
    not able to freely dispose of the merchandise stolen. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s
    decision, thus the Petition for Review was filed before the Supreme Court.

    Issue :
    Whether or not petitioner Aristotel Valenzuela is guilty of frustrated theft.

    Held :
    Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code provides that a felony is consummated when all the elements
    necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. In the crime of theft, the following
    elements should be present –
    (1) that there be taking of personal property;
    (2) that said property belongs to another;
    (3) that the taking be done with intent to gain;
    (4) that the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and
    (5) that the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidating of
    persons or force upon things.

    That though Valenzuela claims that he was not feely dispose of the merchandise stolen, still the
    elements necessary for the execution is present during the crime was committed. With this, petition is
    denied.

    You might also like