Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 5565. February 10, 1910. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALEXANDER McCORMICK, Defendant-Appellant.

Haussermann, Ortigas, Cohn & Fisher, for Appellant.

Solicitor-General Harvey, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. OPIUM LAW; ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF OPIUM; SUFFICIENCY OF PROOF. — Defendant was ordered by his superior officer on board the steamer Rubi to assist the customs inspectors in searching for opium, of which he found a quantity hidden in a sack of bran, after a few minutes’ search. Defendant having found the drug so quickly was charged with having opium in his possession contrary to law: Held, That the fact the defendant found the opium after only a few minutes’ search, unsupported by other evidence, and considering the statement of the Chinese witness, on board the same ship, who possessed a permit to buy opium in Hongkong and admitted that he did purchase some, which he alleged he afterwards threw overboard, is not sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. CRIMINAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE; CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. — The doctrine repeatedly laid down by this court that a defendant may be convicted upon circumstantial evidence, provided such evidence is consistent with and points to his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and is inconsistent with his innocence, re-affirmed. (U. S. v. Reyes, 3 Phil. Re., 3; U. S. v. Villos, 6 Phil. Rep., 510.)


D E C I S I O N


JOHNSON, J.:


The defendant was charged with a violation of Act no. 1761 of the Philippine Commission, which violation was alleged to have been committed as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"That on or about the 15th of January, 1909, in the city of Manila, Philippine Islands, within the police jurisdiction of said city, to wit: On the steamer Rubi, anchored in the Bay of Manila, within a distance of less than 1
Top of Page