G.R. No. 205760 , November 09, 2015
FRANCISCO T. INOCENCIO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Francisco T. Inocencio was an employee of Far East Bank and Trust Company (FEBTC), last serving as manager of the ATM Services Department. In 1998, a special audit by FEBTC audit officer Liza Sarao investigated anomalous transactions involving petitioner and bank officer Ma. Milagros T. Clemente. The audit revealed that on February 9, 1994, Clemente fraudulently credited ₱1,150,634.74 to an account of her relative, Theresa Clemente. On the same day, ₱1,262,774.50 was transferred from Theresa Clemente’s account to petitioner’s FEBTC savings account (No. 5115-12827-6) in three transactions. This amount was later withdrawn. The funding for these transfers came from unauthorized terminations of other clients’ placements. Bank records showed petitioner had no such placements. Florentino Bartolome, Jr., an FEBTC officer, retrieved supporting documents via microfilm and CD-ROM. Petitioner admitted owning the account but claimed the money was from a piggery business with Clemente and others. He admitted giving pre-signed blank checks to Clemente but claimed his current account had no funds at the time. Five Informations for theft in conspiracy with Clemente were filed. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted petitioner of two counts of theft (Criminal Case Nos. MC 99-1456 and MC 99-1457), acquitting him of three others. The Court of Appeals (CA) modified the decision, convicting him only in Criminal Case No. MC 99-1456 (for the ₱1,262,774.50) and acquitting him in Criminal Case No. MC 99-1457 (for ₱450,000.00), while also modifying the penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming petitioner’s conviction for theft in Criminal Case No. MC 99-1456 based on circumstantial evidence.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the CA Decision with MODIFICATION. The Court held that the prosecution sufficiently proved petitioner’s guilt for theft in Criminal Case No. MC 99-1456 through circumstantial evidence meeting the requirements of Rule 133, Section 4 of the Rules of Court: (a) more than one circumstance; (b) proven facts from which inferences are derived; and (c) a combination of circumstances producing conviction beyond reasonable doubt. The circumstances established were: (1) petitioner owned the bank accounts where the funds were transferred; (2) Clemente fraudulently transferred bank funds to Theresa Clemente’s account; (3) on the same day, the amount was transferred from Theresa Clemente’s account to petitioner’s savings account; (4) the money was later moved to petitioner’s current account; and (5) petitioner withdrew the funds via a check he signed. This combination proved all elements of theft: taking of personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, without consent, and without violence or force. Petitioner’s denial and claim of a piggery business were unsubstantiated and could not prevail over positive circumstantial evidence. The Information sufficiently alleged conspiracy by stating petitioner “conspiring and confederating” with Clemente. The Court modified the CA decision by imposing legal interest of six percent per annum on the indemnity of ₱1,262,774.50 from the finality of the resolution until full payment.