People v. Arrieta
People v. Arrieta
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court, as follows:
The present prosecution was instituted by information duly sworn to by tbe Fiscal of tbe district of Arecibo, on tbe 16th of December last, based on section 396 of tbe Penal Code, and which reads as follows:
“In tbe town of Camuy tbe aforesaid Pedro Arrieta Dorregaray executed a bond for tbe manufacture of rum. On November 25, 1903, bis distillery was visited by internal revenue agents, it appearing from bis books that be bad in stock only three gallons, whereas two packages were found on tbe premises containing one hundred and thirty gallons of rum, more or less, which rum bad been made in tbe distillery during the preceding days, entry thereof having*401 been wilfully and maliciously omitted from the books of the distillery. This act is contrary to the law in such case made and provided, and to the peace and dignity of the People of Porto Rico. Ricardo La Costa, Fiscal of the District.”
Upon this information the trial was held on the 2d of February last, when Charles Beatly and Ralph C. Seddon, internal revenue inspector and agent, testified, and no doubt account was had of what was shown by the books taken from Arrieta, which were produced before tlje justice of the peace of Lares, at the time the aforesaid officials testified. The defendant testified in his own behalf, and the Arecibo court,, on the same day, unanimously pronounced said Arrieta guilty of the crime against the public treasury whereof !he had been accused by the Fiscal, he being adjudged to pay a fine of one hundred dollars, or in default thereof to undergo one day of imprisonment in the San Juan jail for each two dollars left unpaid, and to pay the costs. The accused had no counsel in the lower court to defend him, nor is there any bill of exceptions. On the 15th of February a writing was filed confined exclusively to the taking of an appeal, without making any allegations. The appeal was allowed and the accused appeared as appellant in this Supreme Court through Attorney José C. Ramos. The period of citation and for making a deposit to cover the costs elapsed. The Fiscal opposed the appeal and requested that the costs be imposed upon the appellant.
The Fiscal, having been already cited for the hearing on the 12th of last month, the aforesaid deposit was made, and at that stage of the proceedings Pedro Arrieta y Dorregarav entered an appearance as a party thereto, being represented by the aforesaid Attorney José C. Ramos. By reason of sickness, the latter requested that the proceedings be suspended, which request was denied because the physician’s certificate did not conform to the provisions of section 27 of the rules
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.