Colón Arvelo v. Descartes

Supreme Court of Puerto Rico

Colón Arvelo v. Descartes

79 P.R. 809

CourtSupreme Court of Puerto Rico

DecidedMarch 28, 1957

DocketNo. 11864

StatusPublished

This text of 79 P.R. 809 (Colón Arvelo v. Descartes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Colón Arvelo v. Descartes, 79 P.R. 809 (prsupreme 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The findings of fact and the conclusions of law which serve as a basis for the judgment rendered in this [810]*810case by the Superior Court, Aguadilla Part, on September 2, 1955, having been examined, this Court believes that the judgment of the lower court should be reversed. It seems obvious that the judgment rendered in criminal cause No. M-54-263 acquitting Wenceslao Colón Arvelo of a violation of the Spirits and Alcoholic Beverages Act is not res judicata or a bar to the civil action to recover the vehicle confiscated under the provisions of § 62 of the Act. 13 L.P.R.A. § 1717. A forfeiture proceeding is one in rem which by its nature is civil, it being independent of and separate from the aforementioned criminal cause. Cf. Martínez v. Buscaglia, Treas., 69 P.R.R. 406 (1949); General Motors Acceptance v. District Court, 70 P.R.R. 898 (1950); Metro Taxicabs v. Treasurer of Puerto Rico, 73 P.R.R. 164 (1952).

Since the record of the criminal case herein was offered and admitted in evidence without the objection of counsel for the Secretary of the Treasury, the judge shall render the proper judgment on the merits as to the validity of the forfeiture, after giving such evidence the probative value which in his opinion it deserves.

Consequently, the judgment will be reversed and the case remanded to the lower court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The findings of fact and the conclusions of law which serve as a basis for the judgment rendered in this [810]*810case by the Superior Court, Aguadilla Part, on September 2, 1955, having been examined, this Court believes that the judgment of the lower court should be reversed. It seems obvious that the judgment rendered in criminal cause No. M-54-263 acquitting Wenceslao Colón Arvelo of a violation of the Spirits and Alcoholic Beverages Act is not res judicata or a bar to the civil action to recover the vehicle confiscated under the provisions of § 62 of the Act. 13 L.P.R.A. § 1717. A forfeiture proceeding is one in rem which by its nature is civil, it being independent of and separate from the aforementioned criminal cause. Cf. Martínez v. Buscaglia, Treas., 69 P.R.R. 406 (1949); General Motors Acceptance v. District Court, 70 P.R.R. 898 (1950); Metro Taxicabs v. Treasurer of Puerto Rico, 73 P.R.R. 164 (1952).

Since the record of the criminal case herein was offered and admitted in evidence without the objection of counsel for the Secretary of the Treasury, the judge shall render the proper judgment on the merits as to the validity of the forfeiture, after giving such evidence the probative value which in his opinion it deserves.

Consequently, the judgment will be reversed and the case remanded to the lower court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 P.R. 809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colon-arvelo-v-descartes-prsupreme-1957.