Source: http://lawlibrary.chanrobles.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83042:57038&catid=1584&Itemid=566
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 15:59:35+00:00

Document:
G.R. No. 200884, June 04, 2014 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. MILDRED SALVATIERRA Y MATUCO, Appellant.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. MILDRED SALVATIERRA Y MATUCO, Appellant.
On appeal is the Court of Appeals (CA) Decision dated June 3, 2011 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 03687 affirming with modification the Regional Trial Court (RTC)1 Joint Decision2 in Criminal Case Nos. MC04-8838 and MC05-9048 to 9055.
That on or about the period covering March 2004 to October 2004, in the City of Mandaluyong, Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, representing herself to have the capacity of contracting, enlisting and transporting Filipino workers for employment abroad, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, recruit and promise employment/job placement abroad, specifically in Korea as factory workers to Reynaldo Andremesin, Otelio J. Florentino, Ruzzel C. Crisostomo, Ma. Reinaluz De Guzman, Arvin M. Ariguin, Lester Duyao, Rosalyn A. Fernandez and Renante B. Quirao, Jr. for a fee in the amount of P75,000.00, P75,000.00, P83,000.00, P83,000.00, P97,000.00, P57,000.00, P64,000.00 and P49,500.00 respectively, which is beyond the amount provided under the law, without first securing the required license and authority from the Department of Labor and Employment, and despite the receipt of the payment of the fees, accused failed to deploy said complainants for job placement abroad, which act is deemed committed in large scale, in violation of the aforementioned law.
The case was docketed as Criminal Case No. MCO4-8838.
That on or about the period covering April 2004 to October 2004, in the City of Mandaluyong, Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with intent to defraud RUZZEL S. CRISOSTOMO, by means of deceit and false pretenses executed prior to or simultaneous with the commission of fraud, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously pretend and falsely represent to complainant that she has the capacity to recruit, enlist and facilitate his deployment abroad for the amount of P83,500.00, complainant relying on said representation was induced to give and deliver to the accused, as in fact he gave and delivered the said amount to her and which amount accused appropriated for her personal use and despite repeated demands, accused failed and continue to fail to return to complainant said amount, to the damage and prejudice of the complainant.
The same acts were committed against Renante B. Quirao, Jr. for P49,500.00;5 Rosalyn A, Fernandez for P64,000.00;6 Lester C. Duyao for P57,500.00;7 Ma. Reinaluz De Guzman for P83,500.00;8 Reynaldo B. Adremesin for P75,000.00;9 Arvin M. Ariguin for P97,500.00;10 and Otelio J. Florentino, Jr. for P75,000.00.11 The cases were docketed as Criminal Case Nos. MC05-9048-9055. 12 The estafa and illegal recruitment cases were raffled to the RTC, Branch 211, Mandaluyong City.
Upon arraignment, appellant pleaded “not guilty” to all the charges. Trial on the merits ensued.
In Criminal Case Nos. MC05-9053, MC05-9054 and MC05-9055, for Estafa involving Reynaldo B. Adremesin, Arvin M. Ariguin and Otelio J. Florentino, Jr., for failure of the prosecution to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the cases against the accused are hereby DISMISSED.
It appearing that accused is detained, the period of her detention shall be credited in the service of her sentence.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the assailed Joint Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City (Branch 211) in Criminal Case No. MC04-8838 is AFFIRMED in so far as it adjudged accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of large-scale illegal recruitment in violation of R.A. No. 8042 or “The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995.” The fine imposed upon accused-appellant is increased to P500,000.00.
6 years, 8 months and 21 days of prision mayor, as minimum, 12 years, 8 months and 21 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum, in Criminal Case No. MC05-9052.
In a Resolution18 dated June 18, 2012, the Court notified the parties that they may file their respective supplemental briefs if they so desire; and required the Superintendent of the Correctional Institution for Women to confirm the confinement of appellant. Said confinement was confirmed in a letter19 dated July 26, 2012. Appellant filed a Manifestation in Lieu of Supplemental Brief20 since her defenses and relevant issues have been exhaustively and substantially discussed in her appellant’s brief; while appellee, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed its Supplemental Brief21 on September 20, 2012.
We affirm appellant’s conviction with modification, however, on the penalties imposed.
The persons criminally liable for the above offenses are the principals, accomplices and accessories. In case of juridical persons, the officers having control, management or direction of their business shall be liable.
Provided, however, That the maximum penalty shall be imposed if the person illegally recruited is less than eighteen (18) years of age or committed by a non-licensee or non-holder of authority.
In this case, appellant engaged in recruitment when she represented herself to be capable of deploying workers to South Korea upon submission of the pertinent documents and payment of the required fees. As appellant claimed to be the liaison officer of Llanesa Consultancy Services, the victims believed that she indeed had the capability to deploy them abroad. All the witnesses and the supposed victims identified appellant as the one who made such representation and received the payments they made evidenced by the petty cash vouchers and receipts she signed. Moreover, appellant was caught in an entrapment operation when she received the amount demanded allegedly as additional requirement before they can be deployed abroad. It was, likewise, certified to by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Licensing Division that neither appellant nor Llanesa Consultancy Services were licensed to recruit workers for overseas employment. It is also clear from the evidence presented that the crime of illegal recruitment was committed by appellant against five persons.
Clearly, we find no reason to disturb the RTC’s findings as affirmed by the CA, that appellant committed the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale.
Now on the appropriate penalties.
As the crime was committed in large scale, it is an offense involving economic sabotage and is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine of not less than P500,000.00 nor more than P1,000,000.00. The CA thus aptly imposed the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000.00.
As the amounts defrauded exceeded P22,000.00, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period which is 6 years, 8 months and 21 days to 8 years.
Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum term shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the RPC, or anywhere within prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods or 6 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months. Clearly, the modification made by the CA on the RTC computation of the minimum term is improper. The minimum term imposed which is 6 years, 8 months and 21 days of prision mayor is way above the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the RPC. Although the minimum term imposed by the RTC which is 4 years is within the range, we further modify the same and make it 4 years and 2 months in all the cases.
The CA, thus, imposed the correct maximum term of the indeterminate penalties.
In Criminal Case No. MC04-8838, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierra GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Illegal Recruitment committed in large scale. She is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P500,000.00.
In Criminal Case No. MC05-9048, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierra GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa and sentences her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 12 years, 8 months, 21 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and to indemnify Ruzzel Crisostomo the amount of P83,500.00.
In Criminal Case No. MC05-9049, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierra GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa and sentences her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 8 years, 8 months, 21 days of prision mayor, as maximum, and to indemnify Renante B. Quirao, Jr. the amount of P49,500.00.
In Criminal Case No. MC05-9050, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierr GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa and sentences her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 10 years, 8 months, 21 days of prision mayor, as maximum, and to indemnify Rosalyn A. Fernandez the amount of P64,000.00.
In Criminal Case No. MC05-9051, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierra GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa and sentences her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 9 years, 8 months, 21 days of prision mayor, as maximum, and to indemnify Lester C. Duyao the amount of P57,500.00.
In Criminal Case No. MC05-9052, the Court finds appellant Mildred M. Salvatierra GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa and sentences her to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 12 years, 8 months, 21 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and to indemnify Reinaluz De Guzman the amount of P83,500.00.
Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Villarama, Jr.,* Perlas-Bernabe,** and Leonen, JJ., concur.
** Designated additional member in lieu of Associate Justice Catral Mendoza, per Raffle dated October 15, 2012.
1 Branch 211, Mandaluyong City.
2 Penned by Associate Justice Marlene Gonzales-Sison, with Associate Justices Noel G. Tijam and Leoncia R. Dimagiba, concurring; rollo, pp. 2-24.
12 Id. at 65, 102-115.
15 Penned by Acting Presiding Judge Edwin D. Sorongon.
16 Records, Vol. II, pp. 673-674.
22People v. Chua, G.R. No. 187052, September 13, 2012, 680 SCRA 575, 587.
24People v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 173792, August 31, 2011, 656 SCRA 382, 410.
25 Id. at 411; People v. Tuguinay, G.R. No. 186132, February 27, 2012, 667 SCRA 74, 78; People v. Ocden, G.R. No. 173198, June 1, 2011, 650 SCRA 124, 149.
26People v. Chua, supra note 22, at 592.
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period, if the amount of the fraud is over 12,000 pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos; and if such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed and for the purpose of the other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
28People v. Ocden, supra note 25, at 150.
29People v. Temporada, 594 Phil. 680, 734 (2008).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.