G.R. No. 241336, June 16, 2021
Josephine G. Brisenio, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Josephine G. Brisenio was charged with Estafa through Falsification of Public Documents. The Information alleged that in February 2003, in Angeles City, she induced complainant Clarita G. Mason (her sister) to part with money for a loan to third parties, using as security an original owner’s copy of TCT No. N-245848, which she knew was fake and spurious. Through this falsified title, she obtained P1,666,666.70 from Mason. The facts established that petitioner proposed a business venture involving a Quezon City land covered by TCT No. N-245848, with Mason, petitioner, and Manuel S. Dino each contributing P1,666,666.70. Mason, believing the title shown by petitioner was genuine, withdrew and handed over P1,440,000.00 to petitioner and signed a Deed of Assignment. Later, Mason discovered the title was spurious (its serial number corresponded to titles from Quezon Province, not Quezon City) and that the land had already been sold to another person in May 2003. Despite demands, petitioner failed to return the money. The Regional Trial Court convicted petitioner, sentencing her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 20 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and ordering indemnification of P1,666,666.70. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court initially denied her petition. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration, maintaining there was no evidence she falsified the title or received the money, and requesting the application of the more favorable penalties under Republic Act No. 10951.

ISSUE

Whether the Motion for Reconsideration should be granted, specifically concerning the modification of the penalty imposed on petitioner in light of Republic Act No. 10951.

RULING

The Motion for Reconsideration was PARTIALLY GRANTED. The Supreme Court affirmed petitioner’s conviction for the complex crime of Estafa through Falsification of Public Documents. The Court upheld the factual findings that petitioner possessed and used a falsified TCT No. N-245848 to defraud Mason of P1,440,000.00, applying the presumption that one found in possession of a forged document and who used it is presumed to be the forger. However, the penalty was modified pursuant to the retroactive application of the more favorable provisions of R.A. No. 10951. For Estafa involving P1,440,000.00, the penalty under the amended law is prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. For Falsification by a private individual, the penalty of imprisonment (prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods) remained the same, but the fine under the old law (not more than P5,000) was applied as more favorable than the new law’s fine (not more than P1,000,000). Applying the rules for complex crimes, the penalty for the more serious crime (Falsification) was imposed in the maximum period. The indeterminate sentence was modified to an imprisonment term of four (4) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor, as minimum, to five (5) years of prision correccional, as maximum, plus a fine of P5,000.00. Petitioner was also ordered to pay Mason P1,440,000.00 with legal interest at 6% per annum from the finality of the resolution until full payment.