US V. CARLOS

FACTS:

Mr Carlos stole about 2273 kilowatts of electricity worth 909 pesos from Meralco. The court issued warrant for arrest. Mr. Carlos demurred and refused to enter a plea. He claimed that what he did failed to constitute an offense. His counsel further asserted that the crime of larceny applied only to tangibles, chattels and objects that can be taken into possession and spirited away.

Deliberation quickly followed at the court which subsequently sentenced him to over a year in jail. Mr. Carlos contested saying that electrical energy can’t be stolen (how can one steal an incorporeal thing?). He filed an appeal on such grounds and the court of first instance affirmed the decision. The case reached the supreme court.

ISSUE:

Whether or not larceny can be committed against an intangible such as electricity.

HELD:

Yes, larceny of incorporeal objects is possible. The right of ownership of electrical current was secured by
Art 517 and 518 of the Penal Code which applies to gas.

Analogically, electricity can be considered as ‘gas’ which can be stolen. However, the true test of what constitutes the proper subject of larceny is not whether the subject is corporeal or incorporeal, but whether is is capable of appropriation by another other than the owner. It is a valuable article of merchandise, a force of nature brought under the control of science. Mr. Carlos secretly and with intent to deprive the company of its rightful property, used jumper cables to appropriate the same for his own use. This constitutes larceny.