This is  an appeal taken by the  accused Jose Lopez y Guieb  (alias Emilio Yangco, Marcelo Magno, etc.), from the  judgment of the Court of  First Instance of Manila, the dispositive part of which reads  as follows:

 "Wherefore, the  court  finds the  accused guilty of the crime of estafa charged in the information, defined and punished in article 315, case 3, of the Revised Penal Code, in connection with subsection 2,  paragraph (d)  thereof, and, taking into consideration his plea of guilty  with  no aggravating circumstance present, sentences him to four (4) months and one (1) day  of arresto mayor, to indemnify Kinkwa Meriyasu & Co. in the sum of three hundred seventy-seven  pesos and eighty centavos  (P377.80), with the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment in  case of insolvency, and to pay the costs of the suit.  It is so ordered."

Instead of presenting a brief, the attorney de oficio appointed by this court to defend  the appellant filed the following petition dated May 15, 1932:

"Comes now the undersigned attorney of the appellant and respectfully represents:

"That after a careful study of this case, he found out that

"(a)  The appellant  has  pleaded 'guilty* in  the lower court of the crime charged against him in the information;
"(b)  The trial  court has imposed  upon the appellant the minimum of the minimum penalty provided by law for the crime charged in the information;
"(c)  The trial court has committed no error to the prejudice of the appellant; and
"(d)  This appeal of  the appellant has no reason whatsoever.

"Wherefore, he respectfully prays that he  be  relieved from preparing  any brief for the  appellant and that the decision appealed from be  affirmed."

On June 18, 1936, there was received in the office, of the clerk of this court a motion filed by the accused-appellant praying, for the reasons therein stated, that he be granted the benefits of Act  No. 4221, that the execution of the judgment rendered against him be ordered suspended and that he be placed on probation.

This motion must be filed by him in the Court of First Instance of Manila which is authorized by section 1 of said Act No. 4221 to place him  on  probation, after the proceedings therein provided.

Wherefore, not finding any error in  the judgment appealed from,  it is affirmed in toto,  with the  costs to the appellant.  So ordered.

Avanceña, C. J., Abad Santos, Imperial, Diaz. Recto, and Laurel, JJ., concur.