G.R. No. 204873, July 27, 2016
ESTHER PASCUAL, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Esther Pascual, an employee of the Las Piñas City Assessor’s Office, was charged with the complex crime of Estafa through Falsification of a Public Document. The information alleged that in June 2003, Pascual, conspiring with a private individual, received ₱130,000.00 from complainant Ernesto Y. Wee (through his secretary, Leonor Tiongco) for the purpose of paying the capital gains tax on a property. She then furnished a photocopy of a falsified BIR Official Receipt to make it appear payment was made, while in truth, she misappropriated the money.
The prosecution established that Tiongco, upon referral, met Pascual and her co-accused. Pascual offered to facilitate the tax payment using her BIR “connections.” After initial hesitation, Tiongco handed over the cash upon their insistence and received a signed voucher. Pascual later produced a photocopy of a BIR receipt, claiming the original was left with her contact. The promised title never materialized. A BIR officer testified the receipt was fake and was never issued by their office. Pascual waived her right to present evidence.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming petitioner’s conviction for the complex crime of Estafa through Falsification of Public Document.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction, with a modification on the penalty. The Court upheld the findings that all elements of the complex crime were proven beyond reasonable doubt. Pascual’s false representation of having BIR contacts and ability to facilitate payment constituted deceit. The delivery of the money to her was induced by this deceit. Her subsequent issuance of a falsified BIR receipt was integral to the scheme of misappropriation, as it was meant to conceal the fraud and make the complainant believe the tax was paid. The falsification was a necessary means to commit estafa.
The Court clarified the proper penalty. In a complex crime, the penalty for the more serious offense is imposed in its maximum period. Between estafa and falsification of a public document under Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code, estafa is the more serious crime given the amount defrauded (₱130,000.00). The prescribed penalty for estafa was prision correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court modified the penalty to an indeterminate sentence of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as minimum, to eighteen (18) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. All damages awarded shall earn legal interest.