Case Summary (G.R. No. 211465)
Petitioner and Respondent
• Petitioner: People of the Philippines (Plaintiff-Appellee in lower courts)
• Respondent: Shirley A. Casio (Accused-Appellant)
Key Dates
• May 2–3, 2008: Commission of the offense in Cebu City
• May 5, 2008: Filing of the information charging Qualified Trafficking in Persons
• August 10, 2010: RTC conviction (20 years, ₱1 million fine)
• June 27, 2013: CA decision (life imprisonment, ₱2 million fine, moral damages)
• December 3, 2014: Resolution by the Supreme Court
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (as case decided after 1990)
• Republic Act No. 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003), Section 4(a) qualified by Section 6(a)
• Republic Act No. 4103 (Indeterminate Sentence Law), as modified by RA 9346 (no parole for reclusion perpetua)
Material Facts
- IJM coordinated a buy-bust style entrapment to rescue minors from trafficking in Cebu City’s red-light district.
- Decoys PO1 Luardo and PO1 Veloso, acting as tour guides, used marked money and radio communications to effectuate the operation.
- Accused approached decoys with “Chicks mo dong?” (“Do you like girls?”), then fetched AAA (17 years old) and BBB.
- She negotiated a P500 fee, received marked money in Room 24 of Queensland Motel, and was immediately arrested.
- AAA and BBB were placed under IJM and DSWD custody; AAA testified to prior prostitution under another pimp.
Trial Court Proceedings and Findings
• RTC found all elements of Section 4(a), qualified by Section 6(a) RA 9208, proven beyond reasonable doubt:
– Act: Recruitment and receipt of minors for prostitution
– Means: Financial transaction and inducement
– Purpose: Sexual exploitation
• Held that consummation occurs upon solicitation and receipt of money, not actual intercourse.
• Sentence: 20 years’ reclusion and ₱1 million fine; costs of proceedings.
Court of Appeals Ruling
• Affirmed guilt, modified penalty to reclusion perpetua and ₱2 million fine.
• Awarded each private complainant ₱150,000 moral damages.
• Denied appeal.
Issues on Appeal
- Validity of entrapment without prior surveillance or knowledge of the subject and victims.
- Sufficiency of evidence regarding accused’s predisposition and history in trafficking.
- Appropriateness of trafficking conviction despite victim’s admission of prostitution.
Entrapment Doctrine
• Philippine jurisprudence applies both objective (police conduct) and subjective (predisposition) tests.
• Accused initiated the transaction by soliciting decoys, demonstrating predisposition to commit the offense.
• No undue or illicit inducement by police; marked money and procedural safeguards (Miranda warning) were observed.
• Prior surveillance is not a prerequisite; flexibility in operations is upheld so long as rights are unviolated.
Legal Analysis and Findings
• Elements of qualified trafficking in persons under RA 9208:
- Recruitment, transportation, or receipt of persons (minors)
- By means of monetary inducement
- For the purpose of sexual exploitation (prostitution)
• Knowledge or consent of a minor is immaterial under Section 3(a): consent is rendered irrelevant.
• Victim’s age (17) triggers qualification under Section 6(a) (trafficked person is a child).
• Evidence, including direct testimony and documentary proof (birth certificate), established all elements.
Penalt
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 211465)
Background and Charge
- Accused Shirley A. Casio was charged with qualified trafficking in persons under Republic Act No. 9208, Section 4(a) qualified by Section 6(a).
- Information dated May 5, 2008 alleged that on May 2, 2008 in Cebu City, accused recruited two 17-year-old minors, AAA and BBB, for prostitution and sexual exploitation, acting as their procurer for profit.
- The offense was prosecuted by the People of the Philippines before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 14, Cebu City.
Facts Established by the Trial Court and the Court of Appeals
- International Justice Mission (IJM) coordinated with Cebu City police to conduct an entrapment operation.
- A team of operatives, led by PSI George Ylanan, used PO1 Albert Luardo and PO1 Roy Carlo Veloso as decoys with marked money.
- The decoys posed as tour guides seeking girls to entertain motel guests in Barangay Kamagayan’s red-light district.
- Accused approached the decoys and offered two girls, later identified as AAA and BBB, for P500 each.
- Upon receipt of marked money in Room 24 of Queensland Motel, accused was arrested in flagrante delicto; AAA and BBB were rescued and placed under IJM and DSWD custody.
Testimonies and Documentary Evidence
- PO1 Luardo and PO1 Veloso testified on their decoy roles, conversation with accused, handover of marked money, and prearranged missed call signal.
- PSI Ylanan, SPO1 Mendaros, and SPO1 Altubar testified on the arrest, Miranda rights warning, recovery of marked money, and police blotter entries.
- AAA, born January 27, 1991 (supported by her birth certificate), described her recruitment by friend Gee Ann into prostitution, first customer experiences, and prior pimping activities.
- AAA identified accused as her first pimp on May 2, 2008, recounted accused’s conduct at the motel transaction, and confirmed her minor status.
- No alibi witness (Gingging) was presented by accused to substantiate her defense.
Defense of the Accused
- Accused claimed she was a laundrywoman and was approached by two men seeking “Gingging,” who handed her a note to recruit companions.
- She denied any history of pimping or human trafficking and asserted entrapment or instigation by police.
- Accu