G.R. No. L-6498; April 29, 1954
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ZENAIDA FLORES alias ROSITA PACION, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Zenaida Flores alias Rosita Pacion, came to the house of spouses Marcos Javier and Luz Reyes in Sta. Cruz, Laguna, asking for alms and was later allowed to stay as an uncompensated housemaid. On the afternoon of March 31, 1952, while Mrs. Javier was washing clothes by the river, the appellant, who was taking care of the Javier children including five-year-old Leoncio, left the household with Leoncio and boarded an LTB bus. Upon her return, Mrs. Javier found them missing. The search led Marcos Javier to Manila, where he sought help from LTB passenger agent Hobart Dator. On the morning of April 1, 1952, Dator saw a boy resembling Leoncio with a woman (the appellant) at the LTB garage; the boy was refusing to go with her. Dator took them to a police outpost. The appellant, when questioned by policewoman Josefa Goco, gave a false name and claimed she was a student who found the crying boy in Los Baños and decided to bring him to Manila instead of to the local police. The boy was recovered by his family the next day. The prosecution presented testimonies from the boy’s mother, her sister, policewoman Goco, and agent Dator. The appellant claimed she was an unpaid housemaid for eight months, left the household due to non-payment, and that the boy insisted on following her. She alleged they went to Los Baños, stayed overnight, and she delivered the boy to a police outpost in Manila upon arrival.

ISSUE

The primary issue is one of credibility of witnesses and whether the appellant’s actions constituted the crime of kidnapping as defined under Article 267, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, specifically whether she took the child with criminal intent.

RULING

The Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Laguna, convicting the appellant of kidnapping and sentencing her to reclusion perpetua. The Court found no reason to reverse the trial judge’s findings on credibility, as the prosecution witnesses (Hobart Dator and Josefa Goco) had no motive to falsely incriminate the appellant. The appellant’s uncorroborated version could not overcome the prosecution’s evidence. The Court held that the appellant’s lack of criminal intent was negated by her failure to alert the boy’s father about the boy’s insistence on following her and by her failure to deliver the boy to police authorities in Los Baños where she allegedly first stopped. The delay in filing the complaint was adequately explained, and the failure to file a separate theft charge did not create reasonable doubt, as a kidnapping conviction already carried a severe penalty. The appealed judgment was affirmed.