G.R. No. 211701 . January 11, 2023
FLORENTINO G. DUEÑAS, JR., PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Florentino G. Dueñas, Jr. was the Sales Manager of Automall Philippines Corporation (Automall). Automall had a trade-in program with Honda Cars Makati (Honda Makati) wherein it would purchase pre-owned Honda vehicles from Honda Makati’s clients, remit the payment to Honda Makati, and then sell the vehicles in the secondary market. While Automall’s directors were out of the country, a 1999 Honda Civic was purchased under this program. Upon their return, director Jose Paolo Castrillo discovered the vehicle was not in Automall’s inventory and that Honda Makati had billed Automall for it. Castrillo paid Honda Makati to preserve business relations. When confronted, Dueñas admitted he had sold the Honda Civic for P310,000.00. He did not remit the proceeds to Automall, instead using the money to purchase another vehicle in an attempt to generate a higher profit, but the transaction failed and the money was lost. Dueñas issued a letter dated June 22, 2004 narrating the incident. An Information was filed charging Dueñas and a co-accused with Qualified Theft for taking the proceeds of the sale. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Dueñas of Carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 , instead of Qualified Theft. On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) modified the conviction and found Dueñas guilty of Qualified Theft, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay Automall P270,000.00 (P310,000.00 less P40,000.00 already paid) with interest. Dueñas filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in convicting petitioner Florentino G. Dueñas, Jr. of the crime of Qualified Theft.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA Decision with modification as to the penalty and monetary awards. The Court held that all elements of Qualified Theft were present: (1) Dueñas took personal property (the sale proceeds); (2) the property belonged to Automall; (3) the taking was accomplished without violence, intimidation, or force; (4) it was done with intent to gain; (5) it was done without the owner’s consent; and (6) it was committed with grave abuse of confidence as Dueñas, a Sales Manager, was entrusted with the vehicle and its sale. The Court found Dueñas’ claim that the sale was a “fast break” transaction authorized by Castrillo to be uncorroborated and self-serving. The Court ruled that the CA correctly convicted him of Qualified Theft as charged, not Carnapping, as the Information alleged theft of the proceeds, not the vehicle itself. Applying Republic Act No. 10951 , the penalty was adjusted. The value of the property taken (P310,000.00) falls under Article 310 in relation to Article 309(1) of the Revised Penal Code, with the penalty being prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods. With the aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence, the penalty was imposed in its maximum period. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Dueñas was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months, and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. He was ordered to pay Automall P270,000.00 as actual damages, with legal interest of 6% per annum from the finality of judgment until full payment.