G.R. No. L-6217, December 18, 1911
THE UNITED STATES vs. YAM TUNG WAY, alias NAM SING

FACTS

The defendant, Yam Tung Way, was charged in the Court of First Instance of Manila with the crime of defraudacion de propiedad literaria (infringement of literary property) under Article 539 of the Penal Code. The information alleged that he fraudulently copied, printed, reproduced, and sold a copyrighted “Reduction Table” owned by Manuel Castell, causing damage of P3,000. After the prosecution presented its evidence, the defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the evidence failed to establish the offense charged. The trial court, reserving judgment on the motion, allowed the defendant to present his evidence. Subsequently, the court granted the motion to dismiss and discharged the defendant, ruling that no copyright law existed in the Philippine Islands, and thus the complainant had no exclusive rights that could be infringed to sustain a conviction under Article 539 of the Penal Code. The Government appealed the dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether the Government has the right to appeal from a judgment dismissing a criminal case and discharging the defendant after he has been placed in jeopardy.

RULING

No. The Government’s appeal is dismissed.
The Supreme Court held that allowing an appeal by the Government would place the defendant twice in jeopardy, in violation of the Philippine Bill of Rights under the Act of Congress of July 1, 1902, as construed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Kepner v. United States. Legal jeopardy attaches after arraignment and plea when the first witness is called and interrogated. In this case, the defendant was arraigned, pleaded not guilty, and the prosecution presented its witnesses. His discharge by the trial court, whether based on an acquittal on the merits or a legal conclusion that the acts did not constitute a crime, terminated the trial and barred a second trial for the same offense. The Court emphasized that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy prohibits not only a second punishment but also a second trial for the same offense. Thus, the Government cannot appeal from a judgment of dismissal after jeopardy has attached, regardless of any alleged error in the trial court’s legal ruling.