9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant.

: FEBR…

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™

Like 0 Tweet Share

Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2016 > February 2016 Decisions > G.R. No. 170192, February
10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant.:

Custom Search Search

G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA
BAYKER, Accused-Appellant.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant.

DECISION

BERSAMIN, J.:

An illegal recruiter can be liable for the crimes of illegal recruitment committed in large scale and estafa
without risk of being put in double jeopardy, provided that the accused has been so charged under
separate informations.

The Case

The accused-appellant assails the decision promulgated on July 28, 2005,1 whereby the Court of
Appeals (CA) affirmed her conviction for illegal recruitment and estafa, as follows:

WHEREFORE, for lack of merit, the petition is DISMISSED and the Joint Decision dated
August 27, 2002 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 138 of Makati City is AFFIRMED with
MODIFICATIONS. In Criminal Case No. 01-1780 for Illegal Recruitment, the fine
DebtKollect Company, Inc. imposed is hereby REDUCED to P100,000.00 and in Criminal Case No. 01-1781 for
Estafa, appellant is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years and
two (2) months of prision correccional as minimum to nine (9) years of prision mayor as
maximum.

SO ORDERED.2 ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

Antecedents

The Office of the City Prosecutor of Makati filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Makati the following
amended informations against the accused-appellant and her two co-accused, namely: Nida Bermudez
and Lorenz Langreo, alleging thusly:

Criminal Case No. 01-1780

Illegal Recruitment

That in or about during the month of January, 2001 up to the 23r day of July, 2001, in the
City of Makati, Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, conspiring and confederating together and mutually helping and
ChanRobles Intellectual Property aiding one another, and who have no authority to recruit workers for overseas
employment, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously promise and recruit
Division complainants, Basilio T. Miparanum, Virgilio T. Caniazares and Reynaldo E. Dahab,
overseas job abroad and in consideration of said promise, said complainants paid and
delivered to accused the amount of P52,000.00, P10,000.00 and P5,000.00, respectively

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152 1/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
February-2016 Jurisprudence
G.R. No. 212878, February 01, 2016 - MARLOW
NAVIGATION PHILS., INC., MARLOW NAVIGATION CO.,
LTD., W. BOCKSTLEGEL REEDEREI (GERMANY),
ORLANDO D. ALIDIO AND ANTONIO GALVEZ, JR.,
Petitioners, v. WILFREDO L. CABATAY, Respondent.
G.R. No. 213910, February 03, 2016 - VINSON* D.
YOUNG A.K.A. BENZON ONG AND BENNY YOUNG A.K.A.
BENNY ONG, Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, AS REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE
SOLICITOR GENERAL, Respondent.
G.R. No. 198994, February 03, 2016 - IRIS
MORALES, Petitioners, v. ANA MARIA OLONDRIZ,
ALFONSO JUAN OLONDRIZ, JR., ALEJANDRO MORENO
OLONDRIZ, ISABEL ROSA OLONDRIZ AND FRANCISCO
JAVIER MARIA OLONDRIZ, Respondent.
G.R. No. 181186, February 03, 2016 - SIGUION
REYNA MONTECILLO AND ONGSIAKO LAW OFFICES,
Petitioners, v. HON. NORMA CHIONLO-SIA, IN HER
CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF BRANCH 56 OF
THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF LUCENA CITY, AND
THE TESTATE ESTATE OF DECEASED SUSANO
RODRIGUEZ, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL
ADMINISTRATRIX, Respondents.
A.M. No. RTJ-13-2361 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 13-
4144-RTJ], February 02, 2016 - OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. PRESIDING JUDGE
JOSEPH CEDRICK O. RUIZ, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
BRANCH 61, MAKATI CITY, Respondent.
OCA I.P.I. No. 13-4148-P, February 10, 2016 - SPS.
JOSE AND MELINDA CAILIPAN, Complainants, v.
LORENZO O. CASTAÑEDA, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 96, QUEZON CITY, Respondents
G.R. No. 205814, February 15, 2016 - SPOUSES
ALFREDO TEAÑO* AND VERONICA TEAÑO, Petitioners,
v. THE MUNICIPALITY OF NAVOTAS, REPRESENTED BY
MAYOR TOBIAS REYNALD M. TIANGCO, AND
MUNICIPAL TREASURER MANUEL T. ENRIQUEZ,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 195145, February 10, 2016 - MANILA
ELECTRIC COMPANY, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES SULPICIO
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152
as processing fees of their papers, but on the promise[d] dates of departure, accused
failed to send the complainants abroad and despite demands to reimburse or return the
amount of P52,000.00, P10,000.00 and P5,000.00 which complainants paid as processing
fees, accused did then and there refuse and fail to reimburse or return to complainants
the aforesaid amounts of P52,000.00, P10,000.00 and P5,000.00.
CONTRARY TO LAW.3
Criminal Case No. 01-1781
Estafa
That on or about the 9th day of April, 2001 up to July 23, 2001, in the City of Makati,
Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, conspiring and confederating together and mutually helping and aiding one
another, by means of false pretense and fraudulent misrepresentations, defrauded Basilio
T. Miparanum by previous of [sic] simultaneous act, that is; By pretending to possess
power, influence, qualification authority, transactions or capacity to recruit and deploy said
Basilio T. Miparanum for overseas job, which representations or manifestations the
accused knew to be false and fraudulent as they have no authorities to recruit from the
POEA and they have no principal employer and was merely intended to convince Basilio T.
Miparanum to part his money in the amount of P52,000.00, in consideration thereof, as in
fact complainant Basilio T. Miparanum paid the said amount to the accused relying on
such false manifestation and/or representations to the damage and prejudice of
complainant Basilio T. Miparanum in the aforesaid amount of P52,000.00.
CONTRARY TO LAW.4 ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Only the accused-appellant and Langreo were arrested because Bermudez, who eluded arrest, continues
to remain at large. However, the trial proceeded only against the accused-appellant because of the lack
of notification of subsequent proceedings to Langreo.5
The State presented four witnesses, namely: Virgilio Caniazares, Reynaldo Dahab, Basilio Miparanum
and PO3 Raul Bolido.
Caniazares testified that he and Dahab had met the accused-appellant at the house of a friend in Makati
City in January 2001, and she had then represented herself to be recruiting workers for overseas
employment, probably as hotel porters in Canada;6 that on January 27, 2001, he had gone to her
residence in Pembo, Makati City to pay P4,000.00 for his medical examination, and she had then
accompanied him to the Medical Center in Ermita, Manila for that purpose;7 that on March 30, 2001, she
had gone to his house to inform him that he would be deployed as a seaman instead but that he had to
pay P6,000.00 more; that he had paid the P6,000.00 to her, for which she had issued a receipt; that two
weeks thereafter, she had called him about his deployment on April 21, 2001; that on the promised
date, he had gone to her office at GNB Marketing in Makati but no one was around; that he had then
proceeded to her house, and she had then told him that his seaman's application would not push
through; that the two of them had then proceeded to her office bringing all his certificates of
employment, and that it was there that she had introduced him to her manager, the accused Bermudez,
who promised his deployment in Hongkong within two weeks; that because he had not been deployed as
promised, he had gone to the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), where he had
learned that the accused, Bermudez and Langreo, had not been issued the license to recruit and place
people overseas; and that he had then decided to charge them all with illegal recruitment and estafa in
the Philippine National Police Crime Investigation and Detection Group (PNP-CIDG) in Camp Crame,
Quezon City.8
Dahab declared that on January 27, 2001, he had met the accused-appellant at the Guadalupe Branch
of Jollibee to pay P2,500.00 for his medical examination; that a week later, he had undergone the three-
day training in Mandaluyong City, for which he paid P2,500.00; that she had then demanded from him
the placement fee of P25,000.00; and that after he had not been able to raise the amount, he never saw
her again; and that Caniazares soon called him to urge that he should complain against the accused in
the PNP-CIDG.9
According to Miparanum, he met the accused-appellant through Caniazares, who was his cousin.
Caniazares arrived at his house with her in tow in order to borrow money for his placement fee. On that
occasion, she told Miparanum that she could help him find work abroad and even leave ahead of
Caniazares if he had the money. Convinced, Miparanum went to her residence on April 11, 2001 to apply
as a seaman. On April 17, 2001, he delivered to her P6,000.00 for his seaman's book. She again asked
an additional P6,000.00 for the seaman's book, and P40,000.00 as the placement fee. On April 20,
2001, Miparanum went to her office where he met Bermudez. There, he handed the P46,000.00 to the
accused-appellant but it was Bermudez who issued the corresponding receipt. The accused-appellant
and Bermudez told him to wait for his deployment to Hongkong as an ordinary seaman within two
weeks. Miparanum followed up on his application after two weeks, but was instead made to undergo
training, and he paid P2,700.00 for his certificate. Sensing that he was being defrauded, Miparanum
later proceeded to file his complaint at the PNP-CIDG.10
PO3 Raul Bolido of the PNP-CIDG recalled that in July, 2001, the complainants went to Camp Crame to
file their complaints against the accused-appellant, Bermudez and Langreo. PO3 Bolido, along with SPO4
Pedro Velasco and Team Leader Police Inspector Romualdo Iringan, conducted an entrapment operation
against the accused. They prepared 10 marked PI00 bills dusted with ultraviolet powder and gave the
same to Miparanum. On July 23, 2001, the entrapment team proceeded with Miparanum to Jollibce-
Guadalupe where Miparanum was to meet the accused-appellant. The team immediately arrested her
upon her receiving the marked bills. The PNP Crime Laboratory conducted its examination for traces of
ultraviolet powder on her person, and the results of the examination were positive for the presence of
ultraviolet powder.11
In contrast, the accused-appellant pointed to Langreo and Bermudez who had operated GNB Marketing
Agency. She claimed to have met Miparanum at Jollibee-Guadalupe only for the purpose of bringing him
to Bermudez. She refused to receive the money being handed to her by Miparanum because she did not
demand for it, but the four policemen suddenly arrested her, and one of them rubbed his arm against
her forearm.12
The accused-appellant presented two witnesses, namely: Adelaida Castel and Edith dela Cruz. Castel
testified that she had known the accused-appellant for almost five years; that being then present during
the meeting between the accused-appellant and Caniazares she did not hear the accused-appellant
representing herself as a legitimate recruiter to the latter; that she had been present when Miparanum
delivered the P40,000.00 to Bermudez; and that prior to the entrapment of the accused-appellant,
Caniazares had called their house three times to ask the accused-appellant to accompany him to the
house of Bermudez.13 On her part, dela Cruz attested that she had known the accused-appellant since
March, 2001 because they had worked together in a handicraft factory; that she did not know if the
accused-appellant had been a recruiter; that it was Langreo who had been the recruiter because he had
recruited her own daughter; and that she did not know anything about the transactions between the
accused-appellant and the complaining witnesses.14
2/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
AND PATRICIA RAMOS, Respondents.
Subsequently, Dahab recanted his testimony, and stated that he had only requested assistance from the
G.R. No. 192075, February 10, 2016 - ROBERTO accused-appellant regarding his medical examination. He insisted that he had voluntarily paid P5,000.00
PALO Y DE GULA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
to her, and she had then paid the amount to the Medical Center for his medical examination.15
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 194548, February 10, 2016 - JUANA VDA. Ruling of the RTC
DE ROJALES, SUBSTITUTED BY HER HEIRS,
REPRESENTED BY CELERINA ROJALES-SEVILLA, On August 27, 2002, the RTC rendered its ruling, disposing:
Petitioner, v. MARCELINO DIME, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
HEIRS, REPRESENTED BY BONIFACIA MANIBAY,
Respondent. WHEREFORE, judgment is rendered as follows -

G.R. No. 218396, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NESTOR ROXAS
Y CASTRO, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 208343, February 03, 2016 - SPOUSES
CEFERINO C. LAUS AND MONINA P. LAUS, AND
SPOUSES ANTONIO O. KOH AND ELISA T. KOH,
Petitioners, v. OPTIMUM SECURITY SERVICES, INC.,
Respondent.
a) In Criminal Case No. 01-1780 the Court finds the evidence of the Prosecution sufficient
to establish the guilt of Marissa Bayker beyond reasonable doubt for having violated
Section 6(m) of Republic Act No. 8042 (The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipino Act of
1995) and applying Section 7 of the same Act, which directs imposition of the maximum
penalty if the offender is a non-licensee or non-holder of authority, she is sentenced to
suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of One Million Pesos. She is
further ordered to indemnify Virgilio Caniazarcs of P6,000.00, Reynaldo Dahab P2,500.00
and Basilio Miparanum of P12,000.00.

G.R. No. 199194, February 10, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JOSE B. SAREÑOGON,
JR., Respondent.
A.C. No. 7618, February 02, 2016 - SPOUSES
JONATHAN AND ESTER LOPEZ, Complainants, v. ATTY.
SINAMAR E. LIMOS, Respondent.
G.R. No. 199371, February 03, 2016 - PETRON LPG
DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND TOTAL GAZ LPG DEALERS
ASSOCIATION, Petitioners, v. NENA C. ANG, ALISON C.
SY, NELSON C. ANG, RENATO C. ANG, AND/OR
OCCUPANTS OF NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION,
b) In Criminal Case No. 01-1781, the Court finds the evidence of the Prosecution
sufficient to establish the guilt of Marissa Bayker beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of
estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code and she is
sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for FOUR (4) YEARS, NINE (9) MONTHS
and ELEVEN (11) DAYS of prision correccional to NINE (9)YEARS of prision mayor. She is
further ordered to pay Basilio Miparanum P40,000.00.
No pronouncement as to costs.
xxxx
SO ORDERED.10 ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

Respondents.

G.R. No. 208451, February 03, 2016 - MANILA Judgment of the CA

MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY, INC., Petitioner, v. EZARD
D. LLUZ, NORMAN CORRAL, ERWIN FUGABAN, On July 28, 2005, the CA affirmed the convictions of the accused-appellant by the RTC,17viz.:
VALDIMAR BALISI, EMILIO FABON, JOHN MARK
APLICADOR, MICHAEL CURIOSO, JUNLIN ESPARES,
GAVINO FARINAS, AND WARD TRADING AND
WHEREFORE, for lack of merit, the petition is DISMISSED and the Joint decision dated
SERVICES, Respondents.
august 27, 2002 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 138 of Makati City is AFFIRMED with
G.R. No. 190846, February 03, 2016 - TOMAS P. TAN,
MODIFICATIONS. In Criminal Case No. 01-1780 for Illegal Recruitment, the fine
JR., Petitioner, v. JOSE G. HOSANA, Respondent. imposed is hereby REDUCED to P100,000.00 and in Criminal Case No. 01-1781 for
Estafa, appellant is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years and
G.R. No. 204970, February 01, 2016 - SPOUSES two (2) months of prision correccional as minimum to nine (9) years of prision mayor as
CLAUDIO AND CARMENCITA TRAYVILLA, Petitioners, v. maximum.
BERNARDO SEJAS AND JUVY PAGLINAWAN,
REPRESENTED BY JESSIE PAGLINAWAN, Respondents. SO ORDERED.

G.R. No. 205764, February 03, 2016 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEE QUIJANO The CA opined that the Prosecution had established the elements of illegal recruitment in large scale by
ENAD, Accused-Appellant. proving that the accused-appellant lacked the authority or license to engage in recruitment and
placement,18 and had promised the complainants employment abroad and had then received money
G.R. No. 196651, February 03, 2016 - UWE
MATHAEUS, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES ERIC AND from them;19 and that the Prosecution had also established the estafa by showing that she had
GENEVIEVE MEDEQUISO, Respondents. misrepresented to Miparanum about her power and authority to deploy him for overseas employment,
thereby inducing him to part with his money.
G.R. No. 207355, February 03, 2016 - JENNIFER A.
AGUSTIN-SE AND ROHERMIA J. JAMSANI-RODRIGUEZ, Hence, this appeal.
Petitioners, v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. Issues
OCHOA, JR., ORLANDO C. CASIMIRO, OVERALL DEPUTY
OMBUDSMAN, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, AND JOHN
The accused-appellant assigns the following errors to the CA, to wit:
I.C. TURALBA, ACTING DEPUTY SPECIAL PROSECUTOR,
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, Respondents.
I
G.R. No. 209212, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plintiff and Appellee, v. ROMEL
SAPITULA Y PACULAN, Accused-Appellant. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIMES CHARGED DESPITE THE PATENT WEAKNESS OF
G.R. No. 191185, February 01, 2016 - GUILBEMER THE PROSECUTION'S DEFENSE
FRANCO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent. II

A.M. OCA IPI No. 09-3210-RTJ, February 03, 2016 - THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN NOT GIVING EXCULPATORY WEIGHT TO THE DEFENSE
JUVY P. CIOCON-REER, ANGELINA P. CIOCON, MARIVIT INTERPOSED BY THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT
P. CIOCON-HERNANDEZ, AND REMBERTO C. KARAAN,
SR., Complainants, v. JUDGE ANTONIO C. LUBAO,
III
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 22, GENERAL
SANTOS CITY, Respondent.
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN NOT GIVING WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE
A.C. No. 7594, February 09, 2016 - ADELPHA E. RETRACTIONS MADE BY COMPLAINANT REYNALDO DAHAB20
MALABED, Complainant, v. ATTY. MELJOHN B. DE LA
PEÑA, Respondent.
The accused-appellant insists on her innocence, and points to Langreo and Bermudez as the persons
G.R. No. 207535, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF who had directly engaged in illegal recruitment. She argues that her participation had been limited to
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO signing the receipts as a witness, and to receiving payments for the medical examinations;21 that the
LAGBO A.K.A RICARDO LABONG Y MENDOZA, Accused- CA and the RTC had disregarded the recantation by Dahab; and that had the evidence been limited to
Appellant.
the testimonies of Caniazares and Miparanum, she would have only been liable for simple illegal
G.R. No. 201073, February 10, 2016 - PHILIPPINE recruitment.22
AIRLINES, INC. Petitioner, v. PAL EMPLOYEES SAVINGS
& LOAN ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondent. Did the CA correctly affirm the conviction of the accused-appellant for the crimes of illegal recruitment in
large scale and estafa?
G.R. No. 180402, February 10, 2016 -
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. Ruling of the Court
PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION,
Respondent. We affirm the assailed judgment of the CA.
G.R. No. 208021, February 03, 2016 - OSCAR S. I
VILLARTA, Petitioner, v. GAUDIOSO TALAVERA, JR.,
Respondent.
Illegal Recruitment Committed in Large Scale
G.R. No. 193748, February 03, 2016 - MERVIC
REALTY, INC. AND VICCY REALTY, INC., Petitioners, v. Illegal recruitment is committed by a person who: (a) undertakes any recruitment activity defined under
CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, Respondent. Article 13(b) or any prohibited practice enumerated under Article 34 and Article 38 of the Labor Code;

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152 3/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
G.R. No. 181789, February 03, 2016 - GMA
NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, CENTRAL CATV,
INC., PHILIPPINE HOME CABLE HOLDINGS, INC., AND
PILIPINO CABLE CORPORATION, Respondents.
G.R. No. 202978, February 01, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VICTOR P.
PADIT, Accused-Appellant.
A.C. No. 9807, February 02, 2016 - ERLINDA
SISTUAL, FLORDELISA S. LEYSA, LEONISA S. ESPABO
AND ARLAN C. SISTUAL, Complainants, v. ATTY.
ELIORDO OGENA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 180642, February 03, 2016 - NUEVA ECIJA I
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCORPORATED (NEECO I),
Petitioner, v. ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 194134, February 01, 2016 - JOSE ROMULO
L. FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. LOYOLA PLANS
CONSOLIDATED INC., JESUSA CONCEPCION AND
GERARDO B. MONZON, Respondents.
G.R. No. 187417, February 24, 2016 - CHRISTINE
JOY CAPIN-CADIZ, Petitioner, v. BRENT HOSPITAL AND
COLLEGES, INC., Respondent.
G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA
BAYKER, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 202187, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. ELISEO D. VILLAMOR,
Appellant.
G.R. No. 210542, February 24, 2016 - ROSALINA
CARODAN, Petitioner, v. CHINA BANKING
CORPORATION, Respondent.
G.R. No. 215014, February 29, 2016 - REBECCA
FULLIDO, Petitioner, v. GINO GRILLI, Respondent.
G.R. No. 215107, February 24, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE TOLL
REGULATORY BOARD, Petitioner, v. C.C. UNSON
COMPANY, INC., Respondent.
A.M. No. P-15-3300 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No.12-
4011-P), February 10, 2016 - JOSEPHINE E. LAM,
Complainant, v. NILA M. GARCIA, JUNIOR PROCESS
SERVER, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, SIATON, NEGROS
ORIENTAL, Respondent.
A.M. No. P-16-3423 [Formerly A.M. No. 13-9-89-
MTCC], February 16, 2016 - RE: CIVIL SERVICE
EXAMINATION IRREGULARITY (IMPERSONATION) OF
MS. ELENA T. VALDEROSO, CASH CLERK II, OFFICE OF
THE CLERK OF COURT, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN
CITIES, ANTIPOLO CITY.
G.R. No. 210233, February 15, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF
APPEALS, SPOUSES RODOLFO SY AND BELEN SY,
LOLITA SY, AND SPOUSES TEODORICO AND LEAH
ADARNA, Respondents.
G.R. No. 206256, February 24, 2016 - ALBERT C.
AUSTRIA, Petitioner, v. CRYSTAL SHIPPING, INC.,
AND/OR LARVIK SHIPPING A/S, AND EMILY MYLA A.
CRISOSTOMO, Respondents.
G.R. No. 202695, February 29, 2016 - that it is "a dangerous rule to reject the testimony taken before the court of justice simply because the
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
GJM PHILIPPINES MANUFACTURING, INC.,
Respondent.
A.C. No. 5325, February 09, 2016 - NEMESIO
FLORAN AND CARIDAD FLORAN, Complainants, v.
ATTY. ROY PRULE EDIZA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 201927, February 17, 2016 - VICENTE D.
CABANTING AND LALAINE V. CABANTING, Petitioners,
v. BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK, INC., Respondent.
G.R. No. 184332, February 17, 2016 - ANNA TENG,
Petitioner, v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION (SEC) AND TING PING LAY, Respondents.
G.R. No. 198434, February 29, 2016 - HEIRS OF
LEANDRO NATIVIDAD AND JULIANA V. NATIVIDAD,
Petitioners, v. JUANA MAURICIO-NATIVIDAD, AND
SPOUSES JEAN NATIVIDAD CRUZ AND JERRY CRUZ,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 182629, February 24, 2016 - MERCEDES N.
ABELLA, MA. THERESA A. BALLESTEROS AND
MARIANITO N. ABELLA, Petitioners, v. HEIRS OF
FRANCISCA C. SAN JUAN namely: GLICERIA SAN JUAN
CAPISTRANO, BENIGNA SAN JUAN VASQUEZ,
EVARISTO SAN JUAN, NIEVES SAN JUAN LUSTRE AND
MATILDE SAN JUAN QUILONIO, Respondents.
G.R. No. 207389, February 17, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FEDERICO DE
LA CRUZ Y SANTOS, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 216566, February 17, 2016 - MAGELLAN
AEROSPACE CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152
and (b) does not have a license or authority to lawfully engage in the recruitment and placement of
workers.23 It is committed in large scale when it is committed against three or more persons individually
or as a group.24
The CA properly affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant by the RTC for illegal recruitment
committed in large scale because she had committed acts of recruitment against at least three persons
(namely: Canizares, Dahab, and Miparanum) despite her not having been duly licensed or authorized by
the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) for that purpose.
The accused-appellant's insistence on her very limited participation in the recruitment of the
complainants did not advance or help her cause any because the State established her having personally
promised foreign employment either as hotel porters or seafarers to the complainants despite her
having no license or authority to recruit from the POEA. The records made it clear enough that her
participation was anything but limited, for she herself had accompanied them to their respective medical
examinations at their own expense. In addition, she herself brought them to GNB Marketing and
introduced them to her co-accused. In this regard, the CA pointedly observed:
The evidence established that without any license or authority to do so, appellant
promised private complainants overseas employment in regard to which she required
them to undergo medical examination and training and collected fees or payments from
them, while repeatedly assuring that they would be deployed abroad. On appellant's
contention that it was Nida Bermudez and Lorenz Langreo who received money from the
complainants, even assuming arguendo that appellant never received any payment from
the complainants, actual receipt of a fee is not an essential element of the crime of Illegal
Recruitment, but is only one of the modes for the commission thereof. Besides, all the
private complainants positively identified appellant as the person who recruited them and
exacted money from them. Appellant's bare denials and self-serving assertions cannot
prevail over the positive testimonies of the complainants who had no ill motive to testify
falsely against her.25
The accused-appellant's denial of her participation in the illegal recruitment activities of Bermudez and
Langreo did not gain traction from her charging her co-accused with the sole responsibility for the illegal
recruitment of the complainants. Based on the testimonial narration of the complainants regarding their
recruitment, she was unqualifiedly depicted as having the primary and instrumental role in recruiting
them for overseas placement from the inception. Also, her claim of having been only casually associated
with GNB Marketing did not preclude her criminal liability for the crimes charged and proved. Even the
mere employee of a company or corporation engaged in illegal recruitment could be held liable, along
with the employer, as a principal in illegal recruitment once it was shown that he had actively and
consciously participated in illegal recruitment.26 This is because recruitment and placement include any
act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, as well as
referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for
profit or not.
The accused-appellant protests that the RTC and the CA unreasonably disregarded Dahab's recantation;
and that the recantation would render her liable only for simple illegal recruitment instead of illegal
recruitment committed in large scale.
The protest of the accused-appellant is untenable.
Dahab's supposed recantation to the effect that he had only sought the assistance of the accused-
appellant for his medical examination by no means weakened or diminished the Prosecution's case
against her. Its being made after he had lodged his complaint against her with the PNP-CIDG (in which
he supplied the details of his transactions with her) and after he had testified against her in court
directly incriminating her rendered it immediately suspect. It should not be more weighty than his first
testimony against her which that was replete with details. Its being the later testimony of the Dahab did
not necessarily cancel his first testimony on account of the possibility of its being obtained by coercion,
intimidation, fraud, or other means to distort or bend the truth.
Recantation by a witness is nothing new, for it is a frequent occurrence in criminal proceedings. As a
general rule, it is not well regarded by the courts due to its nature as the mere afterthought of the
witness. To be given any value or weight, it should still be subjected to the same tests for credibility in
addition to its being subject of the rule that it be received with caution.27 The criminal proceedings in
which sworn testimony has been given by the recanting witness would be rendered a mockery, and put
at the mercy of the unscrupulous witness if such testimony could be easily negated by the witness's
subsequent inconsistent declaration. The result is to leave without value not only the sanctity of the oath
taken but also the solemn rituals and safeguards of the judicial trial. If only for emphasis, we reiterate
witness who has given it later on changed his mind for one reason or another, for such a rule will make a
solemn trial a mockery and place the investigation at the mercy of unscrupulous witnesses."28
II
Estafa
The conviction of the accused-appellant for illegal recruitment committed in large scale did not preclude
her personal liability for estafa under Article 315(2)(a) of the Revised Penal Code on the ground of
subjecting her to double jeopardy. The elements of estafa as charged are, namely: (1) the accused
defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by means of deceit; and (2) the offended party, or a third
party suffered damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation.29 In contrast, the crime of illegal
recruitment committed in large scale, as indicated earlier, requires different elements. Double jeopardy
could not result from prosecuting and convicting the accused-appellant for both crimes considering that
they were entirely distinct from each other not only from their being punished under different statutes
but also from their elements being different.
The active representation by the accused-appellant of having the capacity to deploy Miparanum abroad
despite not having the authority or license to do so from the POEA constituted deceit as the first element
of estafa. Her representation induced the victim to part with his money, resulting in damage that is the
second element of the estafa. Considering that the damage resulted from the deceit, the CA's affirmance
of her guilt for estafa as charged was in order.
III
Penalties
The penalty for illegal recruitment committed in large scale, pursuant to Section 7(b)30 of Republic Act
No. 8042 (Migrant Workers' Act), is life imprisonment and a fine of not less than P500,000.00 nor more
than P1,000,000.00. In light of the provision of the law, the CA patently erred in reducing the fine to
P100,000.00. Hence, we hereby increase the fine to P500,000.00.
Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code provides:
4/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
AIR FORCE, Respondent.
G.R. No. 175760, February 17, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. SOGOD DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, Respondent.
G.R. No. 199537, February 10, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. ANDREA TAN,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 179287, February 01, 2016 - PCI JIMMY M.
FORTALEZA AND SPO2 FREDDIE A. NATIVIDAD,
Petitioners, v. HON. RAUL M. GONZALEZ IN HIS
CAPACITY AS THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE AND
ELIZABETH N. OROLA VDA. DE SALABAS, Respondents.;
G.R. NO. 182090 - ELIZABETH N. OROLA VDA. DE
SALABAS, Petitioner, v. HON. EDUARDO R. ERMITA,
HON. MANUEL B. GAITE, P/INSP. CLARENCE DONGAIL,
P/INSP. JONATHAN LORILLA,1 PO3 ALLEN WINSTON
HULLEZA AND PO2 BERNARDO CIMATU, Respondent.
G.R. No. 206758, February 17, 2016 - MARICEL S.
NONAY, Petitioner, v. BAHIA SHIPPING SERVICES,
INC., FRED OLSEN LINES AND CYNTHIA MENDOZA,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 195026, February 22, 2016 - CENTRAL
MINDANAO UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, DR. MARIA LUISA R. SOLIVEN, Petitioner,
v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL
RESOURCES, Respondent.
G.R. No. 174462, February 10, 2016 - PHILIPPINE
OVERSEAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
(POTC), PHILIPPINE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE
CORPORATION (PHILCOMSAT), Petitioners, v.
SANDIGANBAYAN (3rd DIVISION), REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENTIAL
COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG),
Respondents.
G.R. No. 199683, February 10, 2016 - ARLENE T.
SAMONTE, VLADIMIR P. SAMONTE, MA. AUREA S.
ELEPANO, Petitioners, v. LA SALLE GREENHILLS, INC.,
BRO. BERNARD S. OCA, Respondents.
G.R. No. 183486, February 24, 2016 - THE
HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION,
LIMITED, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL STEEL
CORPORATION AND CITYTRUST BANKING
CORPORATION (NOW BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE
ISLANDS), Respondents.
G.R. No. 194960, February 03, 2016 - PRO
BUILDERS, INC., Petitioner, v. TG UNIVERSAL
BUSINESS VENTURES, INC., Respondent.
G.R. No. 203678, February 17, 2016 - CONCORDE
CONDOMINIUM, INC., BY ITSELF AND COMPRISING
THE UNIT OWNERS OF CONCORDE CONDOMINIUM
BUILDING, Petitioner, v. AUGUSTO H. BACULIO; NEW
PPI CORPORATION; ASIAN SECURITY AND
INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ITS SECURITY GUARDS;
ENGR. NELSON B. MORALES, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
BUILDING OFFICIAL OF THE MAKATI CITY
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT; SUPT. RICARDO C.
PERDIGON, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CITY FIRE MARSHAL
OF THE MAKATI CITY FIRE STATION; F/C SUPT.
SANTIAGO E. LAGUNA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS REGIONAL
DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF FIRE PROTECTION-NCR,
AND ANY AND ALL PERSONS ACTING WITH OR UNDER
THEM, Respondents.
G.R. No. 174481, February 10, 2016 - THE PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CRISTY
DIMAANO Y TIPDAS, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 218867, February 17, 2016 - SPOUSES
EDMOND LEE AND HELEN HUANG, Petitioners, v. LAND
BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
G.R. No. 190534, February 10, 2016 - C.F. SHARP
CREW MANAGEMENT, INC., RONALD AUSTRIA, AND
ABU DHABI NATIONAL TANKER CO., Petitioners, v.
LEGAL HEIRS OF THE LATE GODOFREDO REPISO,
REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE LUZVIMINDA REPISO,
Respondents.
A.C. No. 10945 (Formerly CBD 09-2507), February
23, 2016 - ANGELITO RAMISCAL AND MERCEDES
ORZAME, Complainants, v. ATTY. EDGAR S. ORRO,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 208406, February 29, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. ALLAN RODRIGUEZ Y
GRAJO, Appellant.
G.R. No. 177382, February 17, 2016 - VIVA
SHIPPING LINES, INC., Petitioner, v. KEPPEL
PHILIPPINES MINING, INC., METROPOLITAN BANK &
TRUST COMPANY, PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM
CORPORATION, CITY OF BATANGAS, CITY OF LUCENA,
PROVINCE OF QUEZON, ALEJANDRO OLIT, NIDA
MONTILLA, PIO HERNANDEZ, EUGENIO BACULO, AND
HARLAN BACALTOS, Respondents.
G.R. No. 203322, February 24, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. REMAN SARIEGO,
Appellant.
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152
Article 315 Swindling (estafa). - Any person who shall defraud another by any of the
means mentioned hereinbelow shall be punished by:
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
minimum period, if the amount of the fraud is over 12,000 but does not exceed 22,000
pesos, and if such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph
shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each additional 10,000
pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years, in such
case, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed and for the
purpose of the other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or
reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
xxxx
Inasmuch as the prescribed penalty is prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
minimum period, plus one year for each additional P10,000.00 over P22,000.00, provided that the total
penalty shall not exceed 20 years, the penalty to be imposed on the accused-appellant should depend
on the amount defrauded. We note that the RTC took into consideration only the sum of P40,000.00,
and the CA concurred with the RTC thereon. Yet, the records reveal that Miparanum paid to the accused-
appellant and her co-accused not only P40,000.00 but the aggregate sum of P54/700.00 (i.e., the
P6,000.00 for the seaman's book, the additional P6,000.00 for the seaman's book, the P40,000.00 for
placement fee, and P2,700 for his training certificate). The amount of P54,700.00 is the determinant of
the penalty to be imposed.
Pursuant to Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty prescribed for estafa in which the amount
of the fraud is over P12,000.00 but does not exceed P22,000.00 is prision correctional in its maximum
period to prision mayor in its minimum period (i.e., four years, two months and one day to eight years);
if the amount of the fraud exceeds P22,000.00, the penalty thus prescribed shall be imposed in its
maximum period, and one year shall be added for each additional P10,000.00 provided the total penalty
imposed shall not exceed 20 years. Considering that the penalty does not consist of three periods, the
prescribed penalty is divided into three equal portions, and each portion shall form a period,31 with the
maximum period being then imposed.32 However, the floor of the maximum period - six years, eight
months and 21 days - is fixed in the absence of any aggravating circumstance, or of any showing of
the greater extent of the evil produced by the crime,33 to which is then added the incremental penalty
of one year for every P10,000.00 in excess of P22,000.00, or three years in all.34 The resulting total
penalty is nine years, eight months and 21 days of prision mayor, which shall be the maximum of the
indeterminate sentence.
The minimum of the indeterminate sentence is taken from prision correctional in its minimum period to
prision correctional in its medium period (i.e., six months and one day to four years and two months),
the penalty next lower to that prescribed by Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code. We note that the CA
correctly fixed the minimum of the indeterminate sentence at four years and two months of prision
correctional.
In view of the foregoing, the indeterminate sentence for the accused-appellant is from four years and
two months of prision correctional, as the minimum, to nine years, eight months and 21 days of prision
mayor.
IV
Civil Liabilities
The civil liabilities as decreed by the RTC and upheld by the CA are also corrected to reflect the actual
aggregate amount to be restituted to Miparanum at P54,700.00. In addition, the accused-appellant shall
be obliged to pay interest of 6% per annum on the respective sums due to each of the complainants, to
be reckoned from the finality of this decision until full payment considering that the amount to be
restituted became determinate only through this adjudication. chanrobleslaw
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on July 28, 2005 subject to the following
MODIFICATIONS, to wit:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
1. In Criminal Case No. 01-1780, for illegal recruitment committed in large scale, the
penalty of life imprisonment and fine of P500,000.00 is imposed on the accused-
appellant;
2. In Criminal Case No. 01-1781, for estafa, the accused- appellant is sentenced to
suffer the indeterminate penalty of four years and two months of prision
correccional, as the minimum, to nine years, eight months and 21 days of prision
mayor, as the maximum;
3. The accused-appellant shall indemnify complainants Virigilio Caniazares, Reynaldo
Dahab and Basilio Miparanum in the respective amounts of P6,000.00, P2,500.00,
and P54,700.00 plus interest of 6% per annum from the finality of this decision
until full payment; and
4. The accused-appellant shall pay the costs of suit.
SO ORDERED.
Sereno, C.J., Leonardo-De Castro, Perlas-Bernabe, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur. chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Endnotes:
1Rollo,pp. 3-23; penned by Associate Justice Portia Alino-Hormachuelos, and concurred in
by Associate Justice Juan Q. Enriquez, Jr. and Associate Justice Vicente Q. Roxas.
2 Id. at 22-23.
3 Records, p. 79.
4 Id. at 83.
5
Id. at 385.
6 TSN dated October 15, 2001, pp. 4-7.
7 Id. at 8-10.
5/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
G.R. No. 186102, February 24, 2016 - NATIONAL 8 Id. at 12-21.
TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. HEIRS
OF TEODULO EBESA, NAMELY: PORFERIA L. EBESA, 9
EFREN EBESA, DANTE EBESA AND CYNTHIA EBESA,
Id. at 29-34.
AND ATTY. FORTUNATO VELOSO, Respondents.
10 TSN dated November 5, 200 1, pp. 4-23.
G.R. No. 192233, February 17, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. SPO1 11 TSN dated November 19, 2001, pp. 5-15.
CATALINO GONZALES, JR., Accused-Appellant.
12Rollo, p.11.
A.M. No. P-15-3393 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 13-4055-
P], February 23, 2016 - SEGUNDINA P. NOCES-DE LEON
13 TSN dated March 11, 2002, pp. 3-16.
AND LEONOR P. ALAVE, Petitioners, v. TERENCIO G.
FLORENDO, SHERIFF IV, BRANCH 21, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, VIGAN CITY, ILOCOS SUR, Respondent. 14 TSN dated April 29, 2002, pp. 243-246.
IPI No. 15-35-SB-J, February 23, 2016 - RE: 15
VERIFIED COMPLAINT DATED JULY 13, 2015 OF
TSN dated January 22, 2002, pp. 3-7.
ALFONSO V. UMALI, JR., Complainant, v. HON. JOSE R.
16 CA rollo, pp. 27-28.
HERNANDEZ, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, SANDIGANBAYAN,
Respondent.
17 Supra note 1, at 22-23.
A.M. No. P-15-3361 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 10-3381-
P], February 23, 2016 - ATTY. JOHN V. AQUINO, 18Rollo,
Petitioner, v. ELENA S. ALCASID, CLERK III, REGIONAL
p. 15.
TRIAL COURT, OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT,
19 Id. at 15-19.
OLONGAPO CITY, Respondent.

G.R. No. 185603, February 10, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF 20 CA rollo, p. 48.

THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. LOCAL SUPERIOR OF
THE INSTITUTE OF THE SISTERS OF THE SACRED 21
HEART OF JESUS OF RAGUSA, Respondent.
Id. at 57-58.

G.R. No. 208404, February 24, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. VICENTE
LUGNASIN AND DEVINCIO GUERRERO, Accused-
Appellants.
G.R. No. 183529, February 24, 2016 - OFELIA C.
CAUNAN, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
AND THE SANDIGANBAYAN, Respondents.
G.R. No. 207816, February 24, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAUL YAMON
TUANDO, Accused-Appellant.
22 Id. at 59.
23Nasi-Villar v. People, G.R. No. 176169, November 14, 2008, 571 SCRA 202, 208;
People v. Ortiz-Miyake, G.R. Nos. 115338-39, September 16, 1997, 279 SCRA 180, 193.
24
Under Section 6 (m) (Definitions) of Republic Act No. 8042, illegal recruitment "when
committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered as offense involving
economic sabotage;" and illegal recruitment "is deemed committed by a syndicate carried
out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another.
It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more
persons individually or as a group." See People v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 199211, June
4, 2014, 725 SCRA 152, 156-157. cralawred

G.R. No. 171041, February 10, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. MOLDEX REALTY, INC., 25Rollo, pp. 19-20.
Respondent.
26People v. Cabais, G.R. No. 129070, March 16, 2001, 354 SCRA 553, 561.
G.R. No. 188720, February 23, 2016 - QUEZON CITY cralawred

PTCA FEDERATION, INC., Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT

OF EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY JESLI A. 27People, v. Domingo, G.R. No. 181475, April 7, 2009, 584 SCRA 669, 678; Francisco v.
LAPUS, Respondent. National Labor Relations Commissions, G.R. No. 170087, August 3 1, 2006, 500 SCRA
690, 701-702.
A.C. No. 8037, February 17, 2016 - RE: DECISION
DATED AUGUST 19, 2008, 3RD DIVISION, COURT OF 28Flares
APPEALS IN CA-G.R. SP NO. 79904 [HON. DIONISIO v. People, G.R. Nos. 93411-12, July 20, 1992, 211 SCRA 622, 630.
DONATO T. GARCIANO, ET AL. V. HON. PATERNO G.
TIAMSON, ETC., ET AL.], Petitioner, v. ATTY. JOSE DE G. 29People v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 208686, July 1, 2015.
FERRER, Respondent.
30 Section 7. PENALTIES. - x x x
G.R. No. 220481, February 17, 2016 - VICTOR S.
LIMLINGAN AND EMMANUEL A. LEYCO, Petitioners, v.
xxxx
ASIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Respondent.; G.R. No. 220503 - ASIAN INSTITUTE OF
MANAGEMENT, INC., Petitioner, v. VICTOR S. (b) The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of not less than five hundred thousand
LIMLINGAN AND EMMANUEL A. LEYCO, Respondents. pesos (P500,000.00) nor more than one million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed if
illegal recruitment constitutes economic sabotage as defined herein.
G.R. No. 208976, February 22, 2016 - THE
HONORABLE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, xxxx
v. LEOVIGILDO DELOS REYES, JR., Respondent.
31 Article 65 of the Revised Penal Code.
A.C. No. 10605, February 17, 2016 - BIENVENIDO T.
CANLAPAN, Complainant, v. ATTY. WILLIAM B. 32
BALAYO, Respondent. Accordingly, the three periods of the prescribed penalty is four years, two months and
one day to five years, five months and 10 days for the minimum period; five years, live
G.R. No. 209180, February 24, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF months and 11 days to six years, eight months and 20 days for the medium period; and
THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. REGHIS M. ROMERO II six years, eight months and 21 days to eight years for the maximum period.
AND OLIVIA LAGMAN ROMERO, Respondents.; G.R. NO.
209253 - OLIVIA LAGMAN ROMERO, Petitioner, v. 33 Rule No. 7 of Article 64 of the Revised Penal Code states: "Within the limits of each
REGHIS M. ROMERO II, Respondent. period, the courts shall determine the extent of the penalty according to the number and
nature of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the greater or lesser extent of
G.R. No. 208948, February 24, 2016 - JOSE B. LURIZ,
the evil produced by the crime."
Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondents.
34 See People v. Ocden, G.R. No. 173198, June 1, 2011, 650 SCRA 124, 150-151.
G.R. No. 173921, February 24, 2016 - PHILIPPINE
AIRLINES, INC., Petitioner, v. ISAGANI DAWAL, LORNA
CONCEPCION, AND BONIFACIO SINOBAGO,
Respondents.; G.R. No. 173952 - ISAGANI DAWAL, Ads by Google Digest GR GR The GR GR 10
LORNA CONCEPCION, AND BONIFACIO SINOBAGO,
Petitioners, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
Ads by Google Appeals Court About GR By GR
COMMISSION, PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., AVELINO Ads by Google Element GR GR No GR People
L. ZAPANTA, AND CESAR B. LAMBERTE, Respondents.

A.M. No. P-16-3419 [Formerly OCAIPI No. 11-3648- Back to Home | Back to Main
P], February 23, 2016 - AUGUSTO V. SANTOS,
Complainant, v. SHERIFF IV ANTONIO V. LEAÑO, JR.,
SHERIFF III BENJIE E. LACSINA, SHERIFF III ALVIN S.
PINEDA, Respondent. QUICK SEARCH
G.R. No. 184288, February 16, 2016 - ERIC N.
ESTRELLADO AND JOSSIE M. BORJA, Petitioners, v.
KARINA CONSTANTINO DAVID, THE CIVIL SERVICE
COMMISSION, HIPOLITO R. GABORNI AND ROBERTO S. 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
SE, Respondents. 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
G.R. No. 175210, February 01, 2016 - MARIO JOSE E. 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
SERENO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSOCIATION
1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
OF PETROCHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS OF THE

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152 6/7
9/17/2017 G.R. No. 170192, February 10, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARISSA BAYKER, Accused-Appellant. : FEBR…
PHILIPPINES, INC. (APMP), Petitioner, v. COMMITTEE 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
ON TRADE AND RELATED MATTERS (CTRM) OF THE
NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
(NEDA), COMPOSED OF THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
THE NEDA SECRETARIAT, THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY,
THE SECRETARIES OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY,
1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
FINANCE, FOREIGN AFFAIRS, AGRICULTURE, 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, BUDGET
AND MANAGEMENT, TRANSPORTATION AND
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
COMMUNICATION, LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
AGRARIAN REFORM, THE GOVERNOR OF THE BANGKO
SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS AND THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
TARIFF COMMISSION, AND BRENDA R. MENDOZA IN 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
HER CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR OF THE TRADE,
INDUSTRY & UTILITIES STAFF, Respondents. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015 2016
G.R. No. 170631, February 10, 2016 - CARAVAN
TRAVEL AND TOURS INTERNATIONAL, INC., Petitioner,
v. ERMILINDA R. ABEJAR, Respondent.

A.C. No. 8667, February 03, 2016 - INOCENCIO I.

BALISTOY, Petitioner, v. ATTY. FLORENCIO A. BRON,
Respondent. Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!
IPI No. 14-222-CA-J, February 23, 2016 - RE:
COMPLAINT OF ATTY. MARIANO R. PEFIANCO AGAINST
JUSTICES MARIA ELISA SEMPIO DIY, RAMON PAUL L.
HERNANDO, AND CARMELITA SALANDANAN-MANAHAN,
OF THE COURT OF APPEALS CEBU.

Copyright © 1998 - 2017 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016februarydecisions.php?id=152 7/7