You are on page 1of 2

People v Lua Chu

September 7, 1931
Defendants-appellants: Lua Chu and Uy Se Tieng

FACTS:

Uy Se Tieng, consignee of the Shipments of Opium coming from Hongkong, who represented agents of the
real Owners of Shipments of Opium containing 3,252 tins. He collaborated with Juan Samson, chief of the
customs secret service of Cebu, & Joaquin Natividad of the Customs by paying them an amount of P6,000
for the opium to be released safely from Customs.

On Dec. 1929, upon arrival of the Shipment of Opium in the ports of Cebu, Uy Se Tieng informed Samson
that the former consult the real owners of the shipment on how to proceed the payment of P6,000 & will
come over to Samson house on Dec. 17, 1929 to inform the decision of the owners.

On the same day Samson informed the Constabulary represented by Captain Buencosejo & the Provincial
Fiscal requesting a stenographer to take down the conversation between Samson & Uy Se Teung.

On the night of Dec. 17, 1929, Captain Buencosejo and a stenographer named Jumapao from a law
firm and hid themselves behind the curtains in the house of Samson to witness the conversation between
Samson, Uy Se Teung and Lua Chu.

Captain Buencosejo & Jumapao noted the ff. important facts:


1. Uy Se Tieng informed Samson that Lua Chu was one of the owners of the Opium.
2. Lua Chu informed Samson that aside from him, there were co-owners named Tan and another
located in Amoy.
3. Lua Chu promised to pay the P6,000 upon delivery of the opium from the warehouse of Uy Se Tieng.
4. A Customs Collector had a conversation before when Samson was on vacation in Europe, with Lua
Chu and agreed on the business of shipping the Opium.

The following morning Uy Se Tieng and companion, Uy Ay presented papers to Samson & Captain
Buencosejo showed up & caught them in the act & arrested the two Chinese. The Constabulary then
arrested Lua Chu & confiscated P50K worth of Opium (3,252 tins).

ISSUES/HELD/RATIO:
1. WON Juan Samson, a public official, involved in the crime NO
Appellants contended that Samson induced them to import the opium.
o A public official shall be involved in the crime if:
He induces a person to commit a crime for personal gain
Does not take the necessary steps to seize the instrument of the crime and to arrest the
offenders before he obtained the profits in mind.
He obtained the profits in mind even through afterwards does take the necessary steps
seize the instrument of the crime & to arrest the offenders.
o Even though Juan Samson smoothed the way for the introduction of the prohibited drugs, the ff
should be noted that held Samson not guilty for the crime:
The accused have already planned and actually ordered the opium without the consent or
participation of Juan Samson.
Did not help the accused to successfully implement there plan rather, Samson assured
the seizure of the imported drug and the arrest of the smugglers.
This is not a case where an innocent person is induced to commit a crime merely to
prosecute him, but it is simply a trap set to catch a criminal.

2. WON Samson must be excluded from the witness stand even if he was already dismissed from customs
secret service NO
Contention is not one of the means prescribed in Sec 342 of Code of Civil Procedures

3. WON the transcript be accepted as true and correct -- YES


The transcript contains certain admissions made by the defendants. The stenographer attested that it was
faithfully taken down. Lastly, it was corroborated by statement of Juan Samson in the court.

Judgment affirmed.

NOTE:

Entrapment
1. The practice of entrapping persons into crime for the purpose of instituting criminal prosecutions
2. It is a scheme or technique ensuring the apprehension of the criminals by being in the actual crime scene.
3. The law officers shall not be guilty to the crime if he have done the following:
a. He does not induce a person to commit a crime for personal gain or is not involved in the planning of the
crime.
b. Does take the necessary steps to seize the instrument of the crime and to arrest the offenders before he
obtained the profits in mind.

Instigation: This is the involvement of a law officer in the crime itself in the following manners:
a. He induces a person to commit a crime for personal gain
b. Doesnt take the necessary steps to seize the instrument of the crime & to arrest the offenders before he
obtained the profits in mind.
c. He obtained the profits in mind even through afterwards does take the necessary steps seize the instrument
of the crime and to arrest the offenders.

You might also like