PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

MERCEDITAS MATHEUS DELOS REYES

G.R. No. 198795, June 7, 2017
TIJAM, J.:
Facts: Appellant was charged with six counts of Estafa in an Information which alleges
that accused conspiring together with other unidentified accused, feloniously defraud the
complainants on different occasions, by means of false manifestations and fraudulent
representation to the effect that they had the power and capacity to recruit and employ the
complainants for employment abroad, and could facilitate the processing of the pertinent
papers if given the necessary amount to meet the requirements thereto, and succeeded in
inducing said complainants to give and deliver, as in fact gave and delivered to said
accused the sum of money, which amount once in possession, with intent to defraud,
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously misappropriated, misapplied and converted to their
own personal use and benefit, to the damage and prejudice of the complainants.
For her part, appellant admitted that she was the Overseas Marketing Director of All Care
Travel & Consultancy, with All Care Travel & Consultancy as its affiliate. She claimed
that she did not know Suratos, Guillarte, Alayon, Bagay, Jr., and Gloria. She likewise
claimed that she neither signed nor issued any receipt using the name "Manzie delos
Reyes" in favor of the complainants. She further claimed that she was not engaged in any
recruitment and placement activities. During the pre-trial, she admitted that she had no
license to recruit workers for overseas employment.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty for the crime of estafa.

Ruling: Yes. The elements of estafa are: (1) the accused defrauded another by abuse of
confidence or by means of deceit; and (2) the offended party or a third party suffered
damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation.
Here, appellant deceived private complainants into believing that she had the authority
and capability to send them abroad for employment, despite her not being licensed by the
POEA to recruit workers for overseas employment. Because of the assurances given by
accused-appellant, the private complainants parted with their hard-earned money for the
payment of the agreed placement fee, for which accused-appellant issued petty cash
vouchers and used fictitious names evidencing her receipt of the payments.

Ratio Decidendi: A person, for the same acts, may be convicted separately of illegal
recruitment and estafa.

Gist: This is an appeal from the Decision of the CA, which affirmed the Joint Decision of
the RTC, finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of five counts of
Estafa and one count of Large Scale Illegal Recruitment.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. HENRY BENTAYO
G.R. No. 216938, June 5, 2017
PERALTA, J.:
Facts: In the evening of November 6, 2007, appellant raped AAA again at their kubo in
the farm. While AAA was sleeping, she felt appellant, who was armed with a bolo, touch
her face, her breast and then her vagina. Appellant proceeded to undress her, kissed her
private parts, and then threatened to kill her if she shouted. Appellant then mounted on
top of AAA and inserted his penis into her vagina. Thereafter, appellant further
threatened AAA that he will kill her, her mother and her siblings if she told anyone what
happened. Cordero, a neighbor of AAA, on November 29, 2007, heard the latter crying,
thus, she immediately went to AAA's house to peep inside and saw appellant beating
AAA.
Appellant denied the charge against him and insisted that during the time of the alleged
incidents, he was in Barangay Lagao, Lambayong, Sultan Kudarat making charcoal; and
that he was alone at that time.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty of rape.

Ruling: Yes. Under paragraph 1 (a) of Art. 266-A of the RPC, the elements of rape are:
(1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) that such act was
accomplished through force, threat, or intimidation.
In this case, the clear and straightforward testimony of AAA, as corroborated by the
medical findings show beyond reasonable doubt that AAA was raped. When the victim's
testimony is corroborated by the physical findings of penetration, there is sufficient
foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of carnal knowledge.
Anent appellant's defense of denial and alibi, bare assertions thereof cannot overcome the
categorical testimony of the victim. For alibi to prosper, it must be demonstrated that it
was physically impossible for appellant to be present at the place where the crime was
committed at the time of commission

Ratio Decidendi: When the offender is the victim's father, there need not be actual force,
threat or intimidation because when a father commits the odious crime of rape against his
own daughter, who was also a minor at the time of the commission of the offenses, his
moral ascendancy or influence over the latter substitutes for violence and intimidation.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. SANDY DOMINGO
G.R. No. 225743, June 7, 2017
BERSAMIN, J.:
Facts: An Information was filed charging appellant with the crime of Forcible Abduction
with Rape in this wise: That accused, motivated by lust and with lewd designs, and by
means of force, feloniously, abduct and take away one AAA, against her will, and
thereafter, by means of force, violence and intimidation, with the use of a bladed weapon
and actuated by lust and lewd designs, have carnal knowledge of said victim.
Appellant claimed that he and AAA eloped and went to the house of his brother-in-law.
They spent the night there and agreed that they will go to her Aunt's house and get her
things and will proceed to Bicol. When they reached her aunt's house, AAA went inside
while he waited. After a few minutes, a man came out and chased him with a bolo which
prompted him to run. At around 7:00 o'clock in the morning, he was at his sister's house
when the policemen arrived and informed him that there was a complaint filed against
him.
The RTC and CA convicted appellant for forcible abduction with rape.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty of the complex crime of forcible abduction with
rape.

Ruling: The appellant should be convicted only of rape. Under Article 342 of the RPC,
the elements of forcible abduction are: (1) the taking of a woman against her will; and (2)
with lewd designs. The crime of forcible abduction with rape is a complex crime that
occurs when the abductor has carnal knowledge of the abducted woman under the
following circumstances: (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under 12 years
of age or is demented.
Although the elements of forcible abduction obtained, his forcible abduction of AAA was
absorbed by the rape considering that his real objective in abducting her was to commit
the rape.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the main objective of the culprit for the abduction of the victim
of rape was to have carnal knowledge of her, he could be convicted only of rape.