G.R. No. 75362 March 6, 1990
JESUS ESTACIO Y ESTRELLA, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN, THIRD DIVISION, respondent.

FACTS

The case originated from a complex fraud scheme against banking institutions. Romero Villasanta opened multiple current accounts in different banks with minimal deposits. On August 28, 1981, he deposited two checks totaling P648,485.70, drawn against his nearly empty Solid Bank Lucena account, into his Traders Royal Bank Pasig account. These checks were sent for clearing at the Central Bank. Petitioner Jesus Estacio, a janitor-messenger at the Central Bank, intercepted the demand envelope containing these checks. He brought it to a comfort room where co-accused Manuel Valentino, a bookkeeper, and Villasanta were waiting. Valentino removed the crucial checks and handed them to Villasanta, then altered the bank clearing statement and a Central Bank Manifest to conceal the transaction. Due to the alterations, Solid Bank Lucena received no notice of the checks, leading Traders Royal Bank to credit Villasanta’s account. He subsequently withdrew substantial sums.

ISSUE

The primary issue for reconsideration was whether the Sandiganbayan correctly found petitioner Estacio guilty as a co-principal by conspiracy for the crime of Estafa thru Falsification of Public/Commercial Documents.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the motion for reconsideration and affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the existence of conspiracy, which the Court found amply established by evidence. Conspiracy exists when several accused perform acts toward the same criminal objective, with their actions, though seemingly independent, constituting concerted efforts. The Court cited precedent (People v. Dalusag) to support this principle. Estacio’s active participation was demonstrated by his presence at a planning meeting at the Ramada Hotel where the plot’s mechanics were discussed, and by his execution of a specific role: intercepting and diverting the critical demand envelope to facilitate the alteration and theft of the checks. This direct involvement made him a co-conspirator. The Court also rejected Estacio’s claim of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. The requisite conditions—that the surrender be spontaneous, to a person in authority, and before actual arrest—were absent. Evidence showed Estacio went to the NBI upon his superior’s instruction, not voluntarily to acknowledge guilt or submit unconditionally. Therefore, his culpability as a co-principal, acting in conspiracy with Villasanta and Valentino to defraud the banks through falsification, was sustained beyond reasonable doubt.