GR 159255; (January, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 159255 ; January 28, 2008
RODOLFO VASQUEZ, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Rodolfo Vasquez, along with co-accused Filipina Antonio and Dolores Javier, was charged with estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code. The Information alleged that from September 10 to 27, 1991, in Makati, they conspired to defraud Gemma Argoso by inducing her to lend them P708,000. They misrepresented that the loan would finance a mango plantation on land owned by Vasquez, secured by a Transfer Certificate of Title, and that they had applied for a bank loan for the project. They even showed Argoso a different, developed mango farm to bolster the deception. Upon obtaining the money, they absconded. The property mortgaged was later discovered to be barren and not the land inspected.
The trial court convicted Vasquez, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty of 17 years, 4 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum, and ordered him to indemnify Argoso P708,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to an indeterminate sentence of 12 years of prision mayor as minimum to 30 years of reclusion perpetua as maximum, citing People v. Hernando.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly imposed the penalty for estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Vasquez’s conviction but modified the penalty. The Court clarified that the appellate court erroneously relied on People v. Hernando, which involved estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(d) concerning bouncing checks, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 818. PD 818 specifically increased penalties for estafa via worthless checks, capping the maximum at 30 years termed as reclusion perpetua. This special amendment does not apply to estafa under paragraph 2(a) involving deceit, as in Vasquez’s case.
For estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a), the basic penalty is prision correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum. Since the amount defrauded (P708,000) exceeds P22,000, the penalty is imposed in its maximum period, with one additional year for every P10,000 in excess. However, under Article 315, the total penalty shall not exceed 20 years. The maximum term is taken from the penalty prescribed by law for the offense, which, after computation, is reclusion temporal. Thus, the proper indeterminate penalty is four years and two months of prision correccional as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum. The indemnity order stands.