GR 193667; (February, 2012) (Digest)
G.R. No. 193667 ; February 29, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. MARIAVIC ESPENILLA y MERCADO, Appellant.
FACTS
The appellant, Mariavic Espenilla y Mercado, was charged with large scale illegal recruitment and three counts of estafa. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted her of large scale illegal recruitment and two counts of estafa, based on the testimonies of three complainants—Loreto Cueto, Mariel Alviar, and Mario Pagcaliwagan. They testified that the appellant, without a valid license from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration, recruited them for jobs in Ireland and collected processing fees. The RTC rejected the subsequent recantations of Alviar and Pagcaliwagan, noting Pagcaliwagan recanted only after recovering his money. The RTC imposed life imprisonment and a fine for illegal recruitment, and indeterminate penalties for estafa.
The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s findings but deleted the erroneously imposed accessory penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute disqualification. It also modified the maximum penalty for estafa. The appellant elevated the case to the Supreme Court for final review.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the appellant’s conviction for large scale illegal recruitment and two counts of estafa.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the CA decision. For large scale illegal recruitment, all elements were proven: the appellant had no license, she undertook recruitment activities, and she committed the act against three or more persons. The Court upheld the lower courts’ rejection of the witnesses’ recantations, emphasizing that recantations are unreliable and often procured through intimidation or monetary consideration. The penalty of life imprisonment and a ₱500,000.00 fine was correctly imposed, and the CA properly deleted the unauthorized accessory penalties.
For estafa, the elements of deceit and damage were established. The appellant defrauded Cueto and Alviar of ₱20,000.00 and ₱15,000.00, respectively. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum penalty was correctly taken from prision correccional minimum and medium. The maximum term was properly based on the medium period of the prescribed penalty for amounts over ₱12,000.00, resulting in a maximum of five years, five months, and eleven days of prision correccional for each count. The Court found no reversible error in the factual and legal conclusions of the lower courts.