GR 127848; (July, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 127848 ; July 17, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. MARLENE OLERMO @ Marlene Tolentino, appellant.
FACTS
Appellant Marlene Olermo was charged before the Regional Trial Court with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and five counts of Estafa. The information for illegal recruitment alleged that from February to June 1993, in Valenzuela, Metro Manila, she willfully and unlawfully recruited and promised employment abroad for a fee to five individuals—Ariston Villanueva, Mary Jane Aquino-Villanueva, Alfred Bryant Berador, Frennie Majarucon, and Wilfredo Tubale—without securing the necessary license from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration. The separate estafa charges, under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code, detailed that she defrauded complainants Napoleon Aparicio, Mary Jane Aquino-Villanueva, Ariston Villanueva, Frennie Majarucon, and Alfred Bryant Berador by falsely representing her capacity to secure overseas employment and inducing them to deliver various sums of money, which she then misappropriated.
The prosecution presented evidence, including testimonies and receipts, showing appellant collected fees from the complainants. The defense denied the charges, claiming the transactions were loans. The trial court convicted appellant on all counts. On appeal, she argued the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly contesting the credibility of witnesses and the sufficiency of evidence for the estafa charge concerning Mary Jane Aquino-Villanueva.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and the five counts of Estafa.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and modified the convictions for Estafa. For illegal recruitment, the Court held that the elements were established: appellant undertook recruitment activities without the required POEA license or authority, and she committed the offense against three or more persons individually or as a group. The testimonial and documentary evidence, including receipts she issued, convincingly proved she promised overseas employment to the five named individuals for a fee.
Regarding the estafa charges, the Court applied the principle that conviction must rest on moral certainty. The Court affirmed the estafa convictions concerning Napoleon Aparicio, Frennie Majarucon, and Alfred Bryant Berador, as the evidence of deceit and misappropriation was clear. For Ariston Villanueva, the conviction was affirmed but the penalty was modified in accordance with the Indeterminate Sentence Law. However, for the estafa charge involving Mary Jane Aquino-Villanueva (Criminal Case No. 2862-V-93), the Court reversed the conviction and acquitted appellant. The prosecution failed to present any evidence, such as testimony from the offended party or corroborating documents, to substantiate this specific charge. Absent proof, moral certainty of guilt could not be attained. Thus, the acquittal was warranted for lack of evidence.