G.R. No. 111399 - Pecho vs. Sandiganbayan

Odon Pecho, a Customs Guard of the Bureau of Customs, and his co-accused Jose Catre were charged with a scheme to defraud the government.
They purported to represent a non-existent importer, Eversun Commercial Trading, by submitting false documents.
The fraudulent scheme involved misdeclaring the contents of an import shipment to evade proper customs taxes and duties.

On or about March 16, 1989 (and/or sometime prior), Pecho and Catre allegedly submitted falsified shipping documents including:

The documents falsely declared the shipment as containing agricultural disc blades and irrigation water pumps.
In reality, the shipment contained 300 diesel engines, resulting in a discrepancy in taxes due, calculated at P1,027,321.00.

A spot check initiated by Customs Senior Agent Ruperto Santiago and a random computation by Customs Appraiser Mamerto Fernandez revealed that the shipment’s true contents were automotive diesel engines.
Prompt action by Customs officials led to the issuance of a hold order and a warrant of seizure and detention on the shipment.
These timely interventions prevented the consummation of the alleged offense, as the government did not suffer the full extent of the intended tax evasion.

A preliminary investigation was conducted by the investigating prosecutor, who filed a certification stating that reasonable grounds existed to charge the accused.
Warrants for the arrest were issued, and Pecho voluntarily surrendered on March 15, 1991. He posted bail and later pleaded not guilty at arraignment on March 20, 1991.
During trial, the evidence established that Pecho and Catre deliberately engaged in a fraudulent scheme by using falsified documents to cause undue injury to the government.
The Sandiganbayan (Second Division) rendered a decision on June 28, 1993, finding Pecho guilty and sentencing him under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Alleged procedural defects concerning the preliminary investigation certification as required by Sections 3 and 4, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court and other procedural rules.
Failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on the presumption of innocence.
Inability to establish the necessary elements of the offense as charged, particularly regarding actual injury.
Argument that attempted violations of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 should not be punishable.

The respondent Sandiganbayan denied the motion, holding that the petitioner had waived his procedural rights by participating in the trial.
In the course of the proceedings, additional evidence pointed to an alternative charge of attempted estafa through falsification of official and commercial documents.

Punishability of the Attempted or Frustrated Stage Under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019

Whether the absence of actual damage (i.e., the “undue injury” element) due to timely intervention precludes conviction under Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Whether the offense is considered consummated despite the thwarted fraudulent act, given that the falsification was designed to cause undue injury regardless of the outcome.

Whether the certification of a preliminary investigation, despite alleged deficiencies in form, was sufficient to validate the information against the accused.
Whether the accused’s failure to raise procedural irregularities at the time of his plea amounted to a waiver of his right to question the investigation process.

Whether the petitioner can be separately convicted for the complex crime of attempted estafa in addition to the charge under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019.
How the principles relating to forgery and the possession and use of falsified official documents establish liability as the presumed author of the forgery.