This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-03-03 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The fact that beans were scattered on the floor inside and in front of the stall of petitioner and in the parking lot does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that petitioner is the perpetrator of the crime. This cannot be equated with the principle of law that a person in possession or control of stolen goods is presumed to be the author of the larceny.[17] Absent proof of any stolen property in the possession of a person, as in the case at bar, no presumption of guilt can arise. Instead, the constitutional presumption of innocence should prevail in petitioner's favor.[18] As to who caused those beans to be scattered inside and in front of the stall of petitioner was not proven. Furthermore, it is not farfetched that those scattered beans could have belonged to Imelda Bautista who also stored beans in the stall of petitioner. It must be noted that the place is a market, a public place where people come and go. Presumably, the complainant is not the only vendor in the market selling beans. | |||||