Case Name: The People v. Fernández
Court: Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
Jurisdiction: Puerto Rico
Decision Date: 1903-05-18
Citations: 3 P.R. 519
Docket Number: No. 12
Parties: The People v. Fernández.
Judges: Messrs. Chief Justice Quiñones, and Associate Justices Hernández, Sulzbacher and MacLeary, concurring.
Reporter: Puerto Rico Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 519–525

Head Matter:
The People v. Fernández.
Appeal from the District Court of Arecibo.
No. 12.
Decided May 18, 1903.
Appeal. — Ckiminal Action. — An appeal in a criminal action must be based upon a question of law.
Evidence. — Pbivate Documents. — No errors are committed by a trial court for failure to properly consider the value of private documents, when it appears from all the evidence introduced at the trial, that said documents may be false.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE.
The hearing on appeal has been had in this case prosecuted by the People of Porto Rico against Antonio Fernán-dez in the District Court of Arecibo for perjury.
Upon a sworn accusation made by Obdulio Cortés, the Fiscal duly filed an information charging that on October 28th; one of the days appointed for the registration of qualified voters for the general election in Porto Rico to be held on November 4, 1902, Antonio Fernández had voluntarily registered in precinct No. 11, of Ciales, after making an affidavit declaring that he owned real property, this affidavit being false, since he was not the owner of said property. To the information was attached the sworn accusation made by Cortés, together with a list of the witnesses for the prosecution.
The information was in due time read to Antonio Fernán-dez who pleaded not guilty and named Juan R. Ramos as his counsel.
The hearing was had on February 5, 1903, when the following private document was offered as evidence for the defense:
“Be it known by this simple and extrajudicial document which I desire should have the same force and validity as if judicially executed, that I, Florencio Fernández, of legal age and married, and in the full enjoyment of my rights, have sold to my son Antonio Fernández four cuerdas of land, for the price of sixty dollars, received by me to my entire satisfaction, and whereof the boundaries are: On the east, bounded by lands belonging to María del Carmen Feliciano; on tlie south, by those belonging to Juan R. Trinidad; on the north, by the lands of Domingo Colon, and on the west, by my own property. In witness whereof I sign the present, together with the witnesses, at Hato-Viejo, Cíales, this 28th day of February, 1902. Witness. At the request of the vendor who does not know how to write, Elviro' Acevedo. Witness. At the request of Ventura Ginés who does not know how to write, Agustín Castro. — At the request of Eusebio Colón, Gabriel Acevedo ”.
The hearing having been had, on the 10th of February last the court declared that by the evidence introduced the facts alleged in the Fiscal’s information were proven, and that the accused Antonio Fernández stood convicted of perjury. He was accordingly condemned to serve one year in the' penitentiary at hard labor, and to pay the costs, in default whereof he was to suffer an additional imprisonment of one day for every dollar remaining unpaid..
■ An appeal from this judgment was taken by counsel for the accused who alleged that an error of law had been committed because no legal value was assigned to the private document quoted at length in the third finding of fact, thereby violating section 181, taken in connection with section 117 of the Penal Code, and alleging that an exception or protest had been entered against the questions propounded by the Fiscal to the witnesses for the accused.
The court, in deference to the rights of defendant, considered the aforesaid writing not only as an appeal, hut also as a bill of exceptions, and in view of the provisions contained in sections 298 and 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, directed that the paragraph of the aforesaid writing where reference is made to expeptions, be understood as reading:
“During the trial of the criminal action against Antonio Fernández for perjury, counsel for the defendant entered an exception or protest against the questions propounded by the Fiscal to the witnesses who had been called in by counsel for the accused only for the purpose of acknowledging the signatures placed at the bottom of the private document at the request of the witnesses to the contract and of the vendor, they being asked by said Fiscal to reply to the question: “Did you witness the delivery of the money? which gave rise to contradictions on their part with the witnesses at whose request they had signed, and between two who had signed by request, as to the manner in which the payment had been made”.
The parties having been cited they entered their appearance in the Supreme Court, when the appellant formulated his appeal which was opposed by the Fiscal, on behalf of the People of Porto Rico. A day was set for the hearing which was had on the .29th ultimo, when both, the appellant and Fiscal presented their arguments.
Mr. Ramos [Juan R.), for appellant.
Mr. del Toro, (Fiscal), for respondent.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Fig-ueras,
after making the above statement of facts, delivered the opinion of the court.
The crime prosecuted and punished in this case amounts to a-felony, and therefore the appeal must be based upon a question of law, according to section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In the judgment appealed from, no error of law whatsoever has been committed because the Fiscal, in order to accomplish the high purposes of justice, could question the witnesses as he did, and the court, inspired by the same principles, declared that the questions were pertinent, and reached a correct conclusion from the evidence.
Nothing has been alleged to justify the failure to present the document at the time Antonio Fernández was challenged, since it is to be presumed that he had it, inasmuch as it was dated February 28, 1902, a date prior to his registration as a voter, which circumstance, added to the contradictions of the witnesses, taken into account by the court, shows that said document did not exist on the date on which it purports to have been executed.
In view of the legal provisions cited, and of sections 14, 15, 181 and 117' of the Penal Code and others of general application, we adjudge that we should affirm and do affirm the judgment appealed from, rendered by the Dis trict Court of Arecibo, February 10, 1903, and tax the costs of the appeal against the appellant Antonio Fernán-dez. It is hereby ordered that the original sentence be-executed; that a memorandum of this opinion be entered in the minute-book, and that a certified copy of said memorandum be forwarded to the Secretary of the District Court of Arecibo.
Messrs. Chief Justice Quiñones, and Associate Justices Hernández, Sulzbacher and MacLeary, concurring.