Case Digest (G.R. No. 233598)
Facts:
Juvy Desmoparan a.k.a. "Masyador" v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 233598, March 27, 2019, Supreme Court Third Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Juvy Desmoparan applied on February 27, 2012 for a P105,000 salary loan at Cebu CFI Community Cooperative – Dumaguete City Branch (CFI), misrepresenting himself as an employee of the City Engineer’s Office by using the name “Rodulfo M. Cordura.” To support the application he presented an employee I.D. bearing his photo but the name “Rodulfo M. Cordura” and submitted several documents (membership application, special power of attorney, deed of assignment, certifications and service record, and a promissory note), all reflecting Cordura as applicant/debtor. He obtained cash advances of P20,000 on March 2, 2012, P10,000 on March 9, 2012, and P10,000 on March 10, 2012, signing the name “Rodulfo Cordura” on the cash vouchers.
The real Rodulfo Cordura discovered the alleged transaction upon receiving payroll bills and denied having applied for any loan or membership; he requested investigation and withholding of the remaining check for P69,000. During CFI’s inquiry, branch personnel apprehended another person, Efrain Baena Mercado, using a false identity, who confessed that Desmoparan had recruited him to submit bogus loan applications and that Desmoparan had shown him documents and persons “practicing imitation of signatures.” Mercado’s affidavit and testimony implicated Desmoparan in preparing and using fabricated loan documents.
Desmoparan was arrested and charged with estafa through falsification of commercial documents. At trial the prosecution presented Mirasol (loan clerk), Perocho (cashier/teller), Cordura, Sinco (CFI branch manager), and Mercado; petitioner offered no testimonial evidence. On November 6, 2015, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Negros Oriental, Branch 35, convicted Desmoparan of estafa through falsification of commercial documents and sentenced him to an indeterminate term and ordered restitution of P40,000.
Desmoparan appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA‑G.R. CEB CR No. 02680; on March 14, 2017 the CA denied the appeal and affirmed the RTC judgment with modification of the indeterminate sentence and interest computation. The CA denied reconsideration in a July 20, 2017 resolution. Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court (Rule 45), raising the sole issue that the prosecutio...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in convicting petitioner despite the prosecution’s alleged failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable do...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)