Case Title: Topic:

People vs. Sendaydiego Falsification

Date: January 20, 1978
Ponente: Aquino
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Licerio Sendaydiego
Doctrine:

If a person had in his possession a falsified document and he made use of it, taking advantage and profiting
thereby, the presumption is that he is the material author of the falsification.
Relevant Provisions:

Art. 172. Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents. — The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more than P5,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon:
1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications enumerated in the next preceding
article in any public or official document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document;
and
2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in any
private document commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding
article.chanrobles virtual law library
Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the damage of
another or who, with the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the
next preceding article, or in any of the foregoing subdivisions of this article, shall be punished by the penalty
next lower in degree.
Facts:
Licerio Sendaydiego, provincial treasurer of Pangasinan, in conspiracy with Juan Samson,
and with provincial auditor Anastacio Quimirit as accomplice, used 6 forged provincial vouchers
to embezzle an amount of P57,048.23 from the road and bridge fund. Voucher # 10724 which
evidences payment of P16,727 to Carried Construction Supply Co for supplies used to repair the
bridge in barrio Libertad is proven false due to the following: (1) There was no project to repair
said bridge, (2) The amount was never received by Carried Construction Supply Co, (3) The
supplies were never delivered, (4) The signatures of the engineers were forged, (5) The rubber
stamp containing the governor’s approval is not genuine, (6) Supporting documents (tax, lumber
certificates) were forged along with the district forester’s signature, and (7) The signature of the
checker of the provincial auditor’s office was forged. The other five vouchers which evidenced
payment for the lumber and supplies are also falsified. The provincial engineers and the
employees of Carried Construction Supply testified that the vouchers were false. The six
vouchers were processed by Samson. He signed on the left margin to indicate that they were
presented to the provincial auditor, and then went to the treasurer where Sendaydiego paid the
amounts to him in cash as representative of Carried Construction Supply Co.
The signatures of Sendaydiego and Quimirit were genuine. Sendaydiego’s defense is that he
signed the vouchers under the belief that they were genuine. Samson denied the authenticity of
his own signatures, showing that he received the indicated amounts from Sendaydiego.
Sendaydiego testified that Samson’s signatures were valid. Sendaydiego, Samson, and Quimirit
were charged with malversation through falsification in three separate cases:
1. Criminal Case 23349 for voucher # 10724 in the sum of P16,727
 2. Criminal Case 23351 for voucher # 11955 in the sum of P14,571
3. Criminal Case 23350 for the remaining vouchers with a total sum of P29,748
Quimirit was later acquitted while Samson and Sendaydiego were found guilty and ordered to
pay for the sum of the vouchers. During the pendency of their appeal, Sendaydiego died and was
absolved from criminal liability. His contention that reclusion perpetua is a cruel punishment is
rendered moot by his death and his appeal will only be resolved for the purpose of determining
his civil liability

Issue #1
W/n there was conspiracy
Sendaydiego and Samson
Ratio:
between Yes. Rosete, the assistant provincial treasurer,
testified that the contrary to usual procedure,
he affixed his signature to the voucher after
Sendaydiego signed it. Rosete adhered to these
unusual procedure since Samson approached
him and told him to initial the voucher since it
was already settled and signed by Sendaydiego.
Samson also insisted that the sum be paid in
cash instead of check. Rosete was also in the
position to verify that the cash payments were
made in the treasurer’s inner office since his
table is only a short distance away.
In resume, it appears that the provincial
treasurer wants to base his exculpation on his
 belief that in the six vouchers the signatures of
Samson and the officials in the provincial
engineer's office appeared to be genuine and
on the fact that the auditor had approved the
vouchers. The treasurer claimed that he acted
in good faith in approving the payments of the
proceeds of the vouchers to Samson as the
representative of the supplier, Carried
Construction Co. On the other hand, Samson,
by impugning his signatures in the vouchers,
denied that he received the said amounts from
the cashier of the treasurer's office. These
conflicting versions of the treasurer and
Samson have to be resolved in the light of the
fact that Samson had hand-carried the
vouchers and followed up their processing in
Issue #2 WON Samson signed the false the offices of the provincial government the
vouchers construction materials described in the six
vouchers and denied having received from
Samson the prices of the alleged sales. The
result is the Samson's denial of his signatures in
the six vouchers and in the six receipts and the
provincial treasurer's pretension of having
acted in good faith or having committed an

Issue #3 Won there is a complex crime of vouchers were not his and that the court relied
malversation through falsification
honest mistake have to be disbelieved. The
unavoidable conclusion is that Sendaydiego
and Samson were in cahoots to defraud the
provincial government and to camouflage the
defraudation by means of the six vouchers
which have some genuine features and which
appear to be extrinsically authentic but which
were intrinsically fake.
Yes. Samson claimed that the signatures on the
on circumstantial evidence to prove conspiracy.
However, upon examination, it was found that
Samson actually uses two forms of signatures.
His “genuine” signature found in residence and
tax certificates are in a rounded form of writing
where his surname is encircled. On the other
hand, the questioned signatures attached to
his transactions with the government are in
angular form where the surname is not
encircled. This conclusively proves that Samson
knew that the 6 vouchers were false since he
did not use his “genuine” signature in signing
them.
The rule is that if a person had in his possession
 a falsified document and took advantage of it,
it is presumed that he is the material author of
the same.

No. The falsification of the vouchers was done

to conceal the crime of malversation, not as a
means to commit it. Therefore, falsification and
malversation in this case should be separate
offenses. The provincial treasurer, as custodian
of the money, could have malversed the funds
without resorting to falsification. Falsification
in this case was used as a device to prevent the
detection of malversation. Each falsified
voucher constitutes separate crimes of
malversation and falsification. Samson is
therefore guilty of 12 separate offenses.

Dispositive Portion:
In the service of 12 penalties, the threefold rule in Art. 70 applies. Samson sentenced to 36 up to
51 years imprisonment.
The estate of Licerio Sendaydiego ordered to pay P57,048.23.