G.R. No. 181440 ; April 13, 2011
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Aida Marquez, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Aida Marquez was charged with Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor under Article 270 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The Information alleged that on or about September 6, 1998, in Makati City, Marquez, having been entrusted with the custody of a three-month-old baby girl, Justine Bernadette C. Merano, willfully and feloniously failed to restore the child to her mother, Carolina Cunanan Merano.
The prosecution’s version, as testified by the complainant mother, Carolina Merano, was as follows: Merano, a beautician, knew Marquez as a client who was close to her employers and was nice to her. On September 6, 1998, Marquez borrowed the baby Justine to buy her clothes, milk, and food, promising to return her that afternoon. Marquez failed to return. Merano searched for her daughter and later received a call from Marquez on November 11, 1998, wherein Marquez promised to return the child the next day but also demanded ₱50,000 for expenses incurred. The child was not returned. With police assistance, Merano went to Marquez’s house but did not find Justine. On February 11, 1999, Marquez called again and directed Merano to pick up Justine from the house of Modesto Castillo in Tiaong, Quezon. The following day, Merano, accompanied by police officers, went to Castillo’s house. Castillo informed her that Marquez had sold Justine to him and his wife for ₱60,000 and showed her a photocopy of a handwritten “Kasunduan” dated May 17, 1998, purporting that Merano had given up Justine to the Castillos. The Castillos had subsequently turned over custody of Justine to the Department of Social Welfare and Development.
The defense presented a different account. Marquez testified that she only formally met Merano on September 6, 1998, when Merano offered Justine for adoption. Marquez claimed she declined but referred Merano to her friend Modesto Castillo. That same night, Merano allegedly left Justine at Marquez’s house with her maid. The next day, while Marquez was at the hospital with her son, Castillo came to pick up the child. Marquez instructed her maid not to release Justine, but the child was gone when she returned home. Defense witness SPO2 Diosdado Fernandez testified that on February 12, 1999, he accompanied Merano to Castillo’s house. There, Merano and Castillo executed a document entitled “Kasunduan sa Pagtalikod sa Karapatan at Pagpapa-ampon sa Isang Anak,” wherein Merano gave up her rights to Justine for adoption, which he and another officer witnessed.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Marquez guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced her to reclusion perpetua, ordering her to pay ₱50,000 as moral damages and ₱20,000 as exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the damages, awarding ₱50,000 moral damages and ₱20,000 nominal damages, while deleting the exemplary damages.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court gravely erred in convicting the accused-appellant of Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor when her guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATION. The Court found the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor under Article 270 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
The Court held that all the elements of the crime were present: (1) the offended party is a minor (a three-month-old infant); (2) the accused had been entrusted with the custody of the minor; (3) the accused deliberately failed to restore the said minor to her parents or guardians. The Court found the testimony of the complainant mother, Carolina Merano, to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. Her account that she merely lent her child to Marquez for a few hours to buy necessities was corroborated by her immediate and persistent efforts to recover Justine upon Marquez’s failure to return her. The Court rejected the defense’s claim of a pre-arranged adoption, noting it was implausible and unsupported. The alleged “Kasunduan” presented by the defense was dated May 17, 1998, which was months before the alleged entrustment on September 6, 1998, rendering it inconsistent with the defense’s own timeline. The Court also found the testimony of SPO2 Fernandez regarding the execution of an adoption agreement in February 1999 to be irrelevant to the crime charged, which was consummated by Marquez’s failure to return the child in September 1998.
The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed as proper. The awards of damages were modified. Moral damages in the amount of ₱50,000 were sustained. The award of nominal damages in the amount of ₱20,000 was also affirmed. However, the award of exemplary damages was deleted for lack of basis, as no aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the crime.