G.R. No. 188052; April 21, 2014
JEAN D. GAMBOA, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Jean D. Gamboa was employed as a Liaison Officer of Tambunting Finance Services Pawnshop, Inc. (TFS). Her duties included processing and securing government permits and licenses for TFS branches in Metro Manila. In January 1999, she received a cash advance of ₱81,000.00, evidenced by a signed Request for Payment, specifically for renewing licenses and permits of twelve TFS branches in Manila. TFS, through its officers, repeatedly demanded that Gamboa liquidate the amount, but she failed to do so. Instead, in a letter dated February 27, 1999, she claimed that all licenses had been fully paid as of January 20, 1999, and that she had surrendered the necessary liquidation papers. Investigations later revealed that the permits and licenses for the Manila branches had not been paid for 1999. TFS subsequently paid ₱85,187.00, including surcharges, to renew the permits. Gamboa was terminated and charged with Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the Revised Penal Code for misappropriating the funds.
At trial, Gamboa admitted receiving ₱45,587.65 and ₱24,000.00 (part of the ₱81,000.00) but claimed she handed the money to a certain Joselito “Lito” Jacinto, a casual employee of the Manila City Mayor’s Office, upon instruction of her supervisor, Estrella Cuyno, to facilitate the renewal. She presented a photocopy of a receipt signed by Jacinto (the original allegedly lost) and testified that a messenger and Jacinto’s officemate witnessed the turnover. She also filed an administrative complaint against Jacinto. Rey Marquez, a liaison officer of a sister company, testified that he similarly transacted with Jacinto, who also absconded with his company’s money. The prosecution presented witnesses, including TFS’s Operations Head, who confirmed Gamboa’s receipt of the funds and failure to liquidate.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Gamboa, finding her defense of handing the money to Jacinto an “afterthought” and noting inconsistencies in her statements, including her earlier claim that all licenses had been paid. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s decision.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Gamboa’s conviction for Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the Revised Penal Code.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that all elements of Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) were present: (1) Gamboa received the ₱81,000.00 in trust for the specific purpose of renewing TFS’s permits and licenses; (2) she misappropriated, misapplied, or converted the money to her personal use, as evidenced by her failure to renew the permits and her inability to account for the funds despite demands; and (3) TFS suffered damage as a result. The Court found Gamboa’s defense—that she gave the money to Lito Jacinto—uncredible, noting it was raised only at trial and contradicted her earlier written statement that all licenses had been paid. The Court also emphasized that Gamboa failed to prove she was authorized to delegate the task or turn over the funds to a third party. Thus, her conviction was upheld. She was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of four years and two months of prision correccional as minimum, to thirteen years of reclusion temporal as maximum, and ordered to pay TFS ₱81,000.00 as civil liability with 6% interest from the judgment’s rendition until fully paid.