Case Summary (G.R. No. 218969)
Petitioner
Fernando Pante y Rangasa, adult, employee at a bakery in Naga City, accused of the crime of Theft as defined under the Revised Penal Code.
Respondent
The People of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General.
Key Dates
– December 11, 2004: Loss and recovery of the money.
– June 1, 2005: Filing of Information in RTC Branch 33, Pili, Camarines Sur.
– January 23, 2013: RTC conviction.
– June 9, 2015: CA resolution.
– February 6, 2015: CA decision.
– January 18, 2021: Supreme Court decision.
Applicable Law
– 1987 Philippine Constitution.
– Revised Penal Code (RPC), Article 308, paragraph 2(1) (theft of lost property).
– RPC Article 309 (penalty for theft).
– Republic Act No. 10951 (adjustment of penalties).
– Indeterminate Sentence Law.
– Rules of Court, Rule 45 (Petition for Review on Certiorari).
Factual Antecedents
Dawson Word parked outside his residence after purchasing fish. Unaware, he left a rubber-banded bundle of US and Philippine currency on his lap. The next morning a bakery worker and one minor co-accused observed the bundle on the ground. The minor picked it up and later shared it with his cousin and Pante.
Prosecution’s Case
Word discovered the money missing around 8:00 a.m. on December 11, 2004, and learned from his landlord that a minor had retrieved it. Police investigation confirmed the minor’s finding and the division of funds: US$1,700 to Pante; US$500 and US$2,350 to each minor. Pante returned only part of his share upon police arrival; he had already spent or converted the rest on consumer items and construction materials.
Defense’s Case
The minors testified they found only US$3,000 and initially did not know its ownership. They claimed Pante merely received ten US$100 bills as a “balato” (compensation) and later returned remaining funds and items when confronted by police. Pante asserted he believed the money was unclaimed and did not conspire in its theft.
RTC Decision
The Regional Trial Court found Pante and the minors guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Theft under RPC Article 308, paragraph 1 (old provision) and imposed imprisonment from 2 years 4 months and 1 day to 9 years and 1 day, with actual damages of ₱59,120, ruling that Pante knowingly appropriated money he knew to be lost property and only surrendered it under compulsion.
Court of Appeals Decision
The CA affirmed the conviction but modified the maximum penalty to reclusion temporal of 13 years. It held that even as a non-actual finder, Pante was a “finder in law” who failed to return lost property and appropriated it with intent to gain.
Issues for Supreme Court Review
A. Whether guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt despite alleged failure to establish ownership and direct conspiracy.
B. Whether Pante could be convicted absent proof he conspired with co-accused.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
- Theft of Found Property. Under RPC Article 308, paragraph 2(1), theft includes failure to deliver found property to its owner or authorities. Elements—finding and non-delivery—were met when the minor found Word’s money, shared it with Pante, and none returned it voluntarily. Pante’s instructions to minors to keep the money, and his purchases with it, established animus lucrandi and knowledge of wrongful possession. Positive witness identifications outweighed self-serving denials.
- Finder in Law Doctrine. Citing People v. Avila, the Court explained that one who receives found property with knowledge of its ownership assumes the role—and criminal liability—of the finder. Pante, having taken a portion of the bundle from the minors, became a “find
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 218969)
Procedural Background
- Information dated June 1, 2005 filed in RTC, Branch 33, Pili, Camarines Sur, charging petitioner under Article 308, par. 2, subparagraph (1) of the Revised Penal Code for theft of US$4,550.00 (P254,800.00) and P27,000.00 belonging to Dawson D. Word.
- Upon arraignment, petitioner and two minor co-accused pleaded “not guilty.”
- RTC, Branch 33 rendered judgment on January 23, 2013, convicting all three accused of theft; sentenced petitioner to 2 years, 4 months, 1 day to 9 years, 1 day of imprisonment and ordered payment of P59,120.00 actual damages.
- Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA–G.R. CR No. 36219); CA, by Decision dated February 6, 2015, affirmed with modification—imposing 2 years, 4 months, 1 day of prision correccional as minimum to 13 years of reclusion temporal as maximum.
- Petitioner filed Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court, raising (A) failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and (B) failure to establish conspiracy.
Facts of the Case
- On December 10, 2004, private complainant Dawson D. Word drove to People’s Mart with househelper Angie Beroña, carrying bundled US$4,550.00 and P27,000.00 on his lap.
- After purchasing fish, Word parked his car at his Pili residence; the money bundle fell onto the road unnoticed.
- Early next morning, a bakery worker spotted the bundle; one minor co-accused of petitioner picked it up.
- Word discovered his money missing around 8:00 a.m., initiated search with landlord’s help, learned that petitioner’s minor co-accused had retrieved it.
- Police investigation on December 21, 2004: actual finder-minor admitted finding the bundle; second minor admitted receiving US$500.00 and already spending it; petitioner admitted receiving US$1,700.00.
- Returned to Word: US$1,300.00 by first minor’s parents; US$300.00 and P4,660.00 plus a JVC component and gas stove with tank by petitioner; construction materials not recovered due to prior use.
- All recovered money and items restored to Word.
Prosecution’s Version
- Word’s testimony detailed how he left the money on his lap and drove off, money fell near car.
- Bakery worker’s testimony corroborated location and time of discovery.
- Police affidavit by SPO3 De Castro, SPO3 Corporal, and PO2 Burgos confirmed statements.
- Admissions by co-accused and petitioner, and receipts of returned amounts and items served as direct evidence of appropriation and restitution under duress.
Defense’s Version
- First minor co-accused testified finding 30 pieces of US$100 bills only; initially kept in pocket.
- Co-accused cousin received US$500.00 but returned it to first minor; petitioner was not the finder.
- Petitioner testified overhearing minors’ conversation, admitted receiving US$1,000.00 (“balato”), exchanged for pesos, used to buy appliances and materials.
- Petitioner claimed return of remaining US$300.00 and P4,660.00 was upon police demand, not voluntary.
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
- RTC January 23, 2013 Judgment found all accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of t