Title
People vs. David
Case
G.R. No. 233089
Decision Date
Jun 29, 2020
Lucille David, proprietor of JASIA, charged with illegal recruitment in large scale and estafa for collecting fees from multiple complainants, promising overseas jobs, and failing to deploy them. Convicted, penalties imposed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 233089)

Relevant Laws and Charges

The accused-appellant was prosecuted under Republic Act No. 8042, the "Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995," specifically citing Sections 6(l) and (m) concerning illegal recruitment. Additional charges stemmed from Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code, addressing Estafa. The case underscores the legal definition of illegal recruitment as any act of canvassing, enlisting, or transporting workers undertaken by unlicensed entities, especially when conducted against multiple victims.

Factual Background

The prosecution laid out several charges against Lucille M. David beginning with Criminal Case No. 143740 for illegal recruitment. It was alleged that from February to November 2008, she unlawfully adopted the mantle of a recruitment agency and solicited fees from several individuals. In subsequent cases (143742 - 143747), the specifics regarding Estafa reflected similar patterns of deceit where complainants were duped into paying processing fees and subsequently failed to receive the promised employment or refunds.

Prosecution Evidence and Testimonies

Testimonies from various victims highlighted a consistent theme of misrepresentation by the accused. Victims described making monetary deposits to David under the pretense of securing overseas work, only to find that the promised positions were non-existent. Witness Purita R. Pineda recounted how her daughter’s placement fee of P60,000 was accepted without any subsequent deployment. Other complainants elaborately detailed payments made, the reasons given for delays, and the eventual closure of David's agency, JASIA International Manpower Services.

Defense of the Accused

David’s defense relied heavily on the assertion that she had a valid license when the transactions occurred and attempted to shift blame onto the victims for their perceived impatience or failure to comply with contractual requirements. She contended that the failure to deploy the complainants was not within her control, claiming that funds were forwarded to foreign principals that do not exist per the corroborating POEA certificates, which established the fraudulent nature of her recruitment practices.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The Regional Trial Court found the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of both Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and multiple counts of Estafa. The penalties included life imprisonment and substantial fines specific to the charges under RA 8042 and varied imprisonment terms for the Estafa convictions reflective of the amounts involved.

Decision of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s ruling, upholding the findings of fact and credibility of witnesses presented during the trial. They reiterated that the factual findings, especially regarding the non-deployment of complainants, required respect due to the trial court's proximity to the witnesses, thus reinforcing the validity of the guilty verdict rendered by the RTC.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the appeal, supporting the lower court's findings. It emphasized the gravity and breadth of illegal recruitment laws and affirmed the evidence of arrangements that intentionally misled complainants into parti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.