United States v. Nieves De Vera y Gayte

Summary

The Supreme Court affirmed defendant's conviction for theft of a gold bar and money belonging to Igorots. Defendant argued the crime was estafa since the property was voluntarily delivered for examination and exchange, not theft which requires taking without consent. The Court rejected this distinction, holding that when property is delivered for a specific legitimate purpose but is fraudulently converted by the recipient with intent of gain, it constitutes theft regardless of the initial voluntary delivery. The Court emphasized that delivery for examination did not transfer ownership or juridical possession, and the fraudulent conversion related back to make the original taking larcenous. This established important precedent distinguishing theft from estafa in cases involving property delivered for specific purposes.