Case Summary (G.R. No. 86220)
Key Dates
• Alleged thefts: December 1980 and prior/subsequent dates up to 1981
• Information filed: February 15, 1985 (RTC San Fernando, La Union)
• Trial court conviction: May 1988
• Appeal notice filed: November 17, 1988
• Supreme Court decision: April 20, 1990
Applicable Law
• Revised Penal Code Articles 308–310 on Qualified Theft (grave abuse of confidence by employee)
• 1987 Constitution (post-1990 decision)
• Rules of Court, Rule 130 (admissions) and Rule 119, Section 15 (demurrer to evidence under amended procedure)
• Indeterminate Sentence Law
Procedural History
An information charged the six employees with qualified theft of P118,855.21 by meter-tampering. The trial court convicted them as principals and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua plus indemnification. Motions for reconsideration, new trial, admission of additional evidence, and to invoke the 1988 amendment to Rule 119 were all denied. The defendants appealed.
Factual Allegations
Galvez, suspecting unexplained financial losses, inspected meter readings in May 1981 and discovered a shortage equivalent to 35.5 liters of gasoline. He observed deposits in Ciobal’s bank book, attempted inquiry, and elicited admissions from Ciobal, Ebreo, and Ester Pajimola implicating themselves and co-employees in ongoing meter adjustments and revenue sharing. Auditor Dyquiangco computed aggregate losses of P118,855.21 but his report was excluded as hearsay.
Admission and Conspiracy Issues
The prosecution relied heavily on the uncorroborated testimony of Galvez and on admissions attributed to certain appellants. The Court held that:
- Third-party admissions cannot prejudice co-defendants absent proof they heard, understood, and had opportunity to deny the statements.
- No independent evidence established a conspiracy; co-conspirator declarations post-conspiracy were inadmissible.
- Silence of non-testifying co-defendants did not satisfy the requisites for admissions by silence under Rule 130, Section 23.
Proof of Loss Deficiencies
The exact nature and value of the allegedly stolen gasoline remained unsubstantiated:
- Discrepancy between the amount in the police complaint (P7,246.00) and in the information (P118,855.21).
- Galvez’s testimony on total investment and losses (P80,000) conflicted with auditor’s figures.
- Supporting documents and invoices were unavailable; auditor’s affidavit was excluded as hearsay.
- Evaporation losses and distinctions among fuel types were not accounted for, undermining the loss computation.
Penalty Assessment Errors
The trial court imposed reclusion perpetua despite:
- The 1987 Constitution’s abolition of the automatic review for capital penalties.
- The Indeterminate Sentence Law prescribing a lower range (prision mayor minimum to reclusion temporal).
- Solicitor General’s concession that the proper penalty range was 16 years and 1 day to 20 years.
Denial of Opportunity to Present Defense
Under the amended Rule 119, Section 15, an accused who seeks dismissal for insufficiency of evidence with leave of court may still adduce evidence if the motion is denied. Although appellants filed a demurrer “with leave” and timely moved to invoke the amendment, the trial court refused to reopen their case, violating the retroactive application of a more
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 86220)
Facts of the Case
- Six employees of the Bens Petron Station Service Center, operated by Benjamin M. Galvez, were accused of pilfering gasoline by tampering with pump meters.
- Alleged scheme spanned from March 1980 through May 28, 1981, with repeated meter adjustments and sharing of proceeds among the accused.
- On May 27–28, 1981, Galvez personally investigated a shortage of 35.5 liters of regular gasoline; discovered in Ciobal’s bank book deposits of ₱800 and ₱500 corresponding to missing fuel.
- When confronted, Ciobal fled; the following morning he and fellow employees admitted to sharing proceeds, implicating a group conspiracy.
- Zaldy Carino evaded arrest; auditor Reynaldo Dyquiangco later estimated total losses at ₱118,855.21, although his report was excluded at trial.
Procedural History
- Information filed February 15, 1985 charges qualified theft (Articles 308–310, RPC) with grave abuse of confidence, alleging ₱118,855.21 in losses.
- Regional Trial Court convicted all six appellants on sole testimony of Galvez; imposed reclusion perpetua, joint indemnity of ₱118,855.21, and costs.
- Motions for reconsideration (May 2, 1988), new trial (May 5, 1988), admission of additional evidence (May 10, 1988), and subsequent motions were denied (August 22 to November 15, 1988).
- Appeal filed November 17, 1988; treated as ordinary appeal under the 1987 Constitution’s removal of automatic review for capital cases.
Issues on Appeal
- Whether the evidence—primarily the uncorroborated testimony of the offended party—proved qualified theft beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether conspiracy was