GR 111399; (November, 1994) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111399 November 14, 1994
ODON PECHO, petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Odon Pecho, a Customs Guard, and Jose Catre were charged with violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The information alleged that on or about March 16, 1989, they conspired to cause undue injury to the government by pretending to represent a fictitious entity, Eversun Commercial Trading, to secure the release of a shipment declared as agricultural disc blades and water pumps with computed duties of P53,164.00. Upon examination, the shipment was found to contain 300 units of diesel engines, with correct duties amounting to P1,080,485.00, causing a potential loss of P1,027,321.00. After pleading not guilty, Pecho was tried. The Sandiganbayan found him guilty and sentenced him to imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from public office, and ordered him to pay the Bureau of Customs P1,027,321.00. Pecho filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing, among other grounds, that there is no such crime as an attempted violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 . The Sandiganbayan denied the motion, holding that violations of special laws like R.A. No. 3019 are always consummated regardless of whether the purpose was achieved. Pecho filed the present petition.
ISSUE
1. Whether the attempted or frustrated stage of the offense defined in Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 is punishable.
2. If it is not, whether an accused may nevertheless be convicted for an offense penalized by the Revised Penal Code which is included in the offense charged.
RULING
1. No. The attempted or frustrated stage of a violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 is not punishable. The Sandiganbayan erred in ruling that the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on attempted or frustrated felonies apply to offenses under special laws. The Court held that the rules on stages of execution in Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code apply only to felonies defined and penalized therein, not to offenses defined and penalized by special laws, unless the special law expressly adopts said rules. R.A. No. 3019 contains no such provision. Therefore, for a violation of Section 3(e) to be punishable, the offense must be consummated.
2. Yes. An accused may be convicted of an offense under the Revised Penal Code which is included in the offense charged under R.A. No. 3019 . The Court found that the acts committed by the petitioner, as alleged in the information and proven during trial, constituted the felony of Estafa through falsification of public documents under the Revised Penal Code. Since this felony is necessarily included in the violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 as charged, the petitioner can be validly convicted thereof. The Court modified the Sandiganbayan’s decision, finding petitioner guilty of the complex crime of Estafa through falsification of public documents and imposing the appropriate penalty under the Revised Penal Code, while affirming the civil liability and perpetual disqualification from public office.