CASE DIGEST
Homol y Romorosa v.
People
G.R. No. 191039, [August 22, 2022]
SECOND, LOPEZ, M.V
Abuse of Confidence;
Qualified theft; theft vs Estafa; Simple Theft
An Information must sufficiently allege
the elements of the crime charged to avoid violating the accused's right to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; an accused cannot be
convicted of an offense not charged in the Information.
Dr. Jelpha Robillos hired Arlene Homol
y Romorosa as a clinic secretary and also tasked her with collecting and
remitting installment payments from jewelry customers. Arlene received
P1,000.00 from Elena Quilangtang for a gold bracelet but did not remit the
money to Dr. Robillos. After Arlene resigned, Dr. Robillos reminded Elena of
the unpaid installments, and Elena claimed to have paid Arlene. Dr. Robillos
filed a criminal complaint against Arlene for qualified theft. Arlene pleaded
not guilty, insisting she remitted the money. While the Information designated
the offense as qualified theft, both the RTC and CA convicted Arlene of estafa
involving unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence.
Whether the Information, which charged
Arlene with qualified theft, sufficiently alleged facts constituting estafa,
and whether Arlene's conviction for estafa was proper.
NO.
The SC clarified the distinctions between theft and estafa, emphasizing that estafa
involves receiving money in trust or under an obligation to deliver. The
Information failed to establish that Arlene received the money in a fiduciary
capacity or with juridical possession. Arlene, being a mere collector, had
material possession, not juridical possession. Thus, the SC found the
prosecution failed to prove estafa.
However, the SC determined that the Information
sufficiently charged Arlene with qualified theft. The theft was established but
the prosecution failed to establish the element of grave abuse of confidence
necessary for qualified theft. The SC noted the lack of evidence proving a high
degree of confidence or a relationship facilitating the taking of money. Therefore,
Arlene is guilty of simple theft, and was sentenced to four months and
one day imprisonment. The SC also imposed interest on the P1,000.00 actual
damages awarded to Dr. Robillos.
No comments:
Post a Comment