Case Summary (G.R. No. 158275)
Sufficiency of Circumstantial Evidence for Conspiracy
• Issue: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner conspired with Catre to commit attempted estafa through falsification.
• Legal Standard: Circumstantial evidence suffices only if (a) there is more than one proven circumstance; (b) each fact from which the inference is drawn is established; and (c) the combined circumstances form an unbroken chain leading only to the accused as the perpetrator (Rule 133, Secs. 2–4, Rules of Court). Conspiracy requires proof of agreement and an overt act in furtherance of the common design.
• Findings:
– Witness Calica testified unequivocally that Catre alone introduced himself as agent of the non-existent Eversun Trading, transacted all arrangements, and delivered the documents.
– There was no evidence that petitioner possessed, falsified, or processed any import entry declaration or that he performed any overt act in aid of the scheme.
– The circumstances thus failed to form an unbroken chain pointing exclusively to petitioner’s guilt.
Disposition
The motion for reconsideration is GRANTED. The 14 November
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 158275)
Procedural History
- Original information in Sandiganbayan Criminal Case No. 14844 charged petitioner under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 for violation of anti-graft law.
- Sandiganbayan decision of 28 June 1993 and resolution of 12 August 1993 found petitioner guilty; appealed to the Supreme Court.
- Supreme Court decision of 14 November 1994 modified the conviction to the complex crime of attempted estafa through falsification of official and commercial documents under the Revised Penal Code.
- Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that his acquittal under the special law (R.A. No. 3019) barred subsequent conviction under the general law (RPC) on grounds of double jeopardy.
- Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed Comment, disputing double jeopardy application but recommending acquittal for insufficiency of evidence.
- Solicitor General’s Manifestation of 14 September 1995 reaffirmed the insufficiency of circumstantial evidence and urged acquittal.
- Supreme Court directed memoranda on:
- (a) Sufficiency of evidence for attempted estafa through falsification.
- (b) Validity of convicting under the original information vis-à-vis the accused’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation.
Facts of the Case
- Petitioner Odon Pecho and co-accused Joe Catre purportedly represented “Eversun Commercial Trading of Cotabato City,” a non-existent entity, to customs broker Constantino Calica.
- Catre alone negotiated terms, delivered falsified documents (bill of lading, commercial invoices, packing list, importer’s sworn statement) to Calica, and handled processing of the import entry declaration.
- Petitioner accompanied Catre on transactional meetings but was never introduced by name, never spoke for the group, nor handled or possessed any of the falsified documents.
- No warrant of arrest was ever issued against Catre; only petitioner was arrested and tried.
Issues Presented
- Whether petitioner’s acquittal for violation of Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019 (a special law penalizing only consummated offenses) precludes conviction for the complex crime of attempted estafa through falsification of documents under the Revised Penal Code (a general law), on double jeopardy grounds.
- Whether the original information, which cited Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, adequately informed the petitioner of the nature and cause of the accusa