G.R. No. 218969 - Pante y Rangasa vs. People

Charge and Arraignment
A June 1, 2005 Information charged petitioner Fernando Pante y Rangasa and two minors with theft under Article 308, paragraph 2(1) of the Revised Penal Code for conspiring to convert US$4,550 and ₱27,000 belonging to private complainant Dawson D. Word.
Upon arraignment before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pili, Camarines Sur, all accused pleaded not guilty.

Prosecution Version
On December 10, 2004, Word parked his car in front of his residence in Pili, Camarines Sur, forgetting a rubber-band bundle of US$4,550 and ₱27,000 on his lap; the money fell on the ground overnight and was found by one minor accused, who shared it with his cousin and Pante.
Police investigation on December 21, 2004 traced the money to the three accused; Pante admitted receiving US$1,700, returned US$300, ₱4,660, a JVC component, and a gas stove; all recovered property was later returned to Word.

Defense Version
The minors testified they initially found only US$3,000, then consulted Pante, who took a share as “balato”; one minor returned his share to enable restitution.
Pante claimed he received 10 bills of US$100 innocently, used them to purchase household items, and only returned the balance after police demanded it.

RTC Decision
In its January 23, 2013 Judgment, the RTC held that all the accused were guilty beyond reasonable doubt of theft by failing to deliver lost property, disbelieved Pante’s voluntariness in returning money, and found he instructed the minors to keep the cash.
Pante was sentenced to 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day of prisión correccional as minimum to 9 years and 1 day of prisión mayor as maximum, and ordered to pay Word ₱59,120.00 as actual damages.

CA Decision
On February 6, 2015, the Court of Appeals denied Pante’s appeal and affirmed the RTC Judgment, modifying the penalty to 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day of prisión correccional as minimum to 13 years of reclusión temporal as maximum.
The CA issued a June 9, 2015 Resolution denying Pante’s motion for reconsideration.

Supreme Court Proceedings
Pante filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, challenging both the sufficiency of evidence and the lack of conspiracy proof.
On January 18, 2021, the Supreme Court resolved the petition.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Pante’s conviction for theft despite the prosecution’s alleged failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in convicting Pante for theft despite the prosecution’s alleged failure to establish his conspiracy with co-accused.