Dela Cruz v People (GR 236807 and GR 236810; January 12, 2021)

 Conchita Dela Cruz v People of the Philippines

(GR 236807; January 12, 2021)

Maximo A. Borje, et al. v People of the Philippines

(GR 236810; January 12, 2021)

Peralta, C.J.

Facts: 

    Petitioners were found guilty of estafa through Falsification of Documents in violation of Article 315, Article 171 and Article 48 of the RPC and Section 3(e) of RA 3019 or the "Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practice Act."

    There were charges of fictitious transactions in DPWH between March to December 2001 by high ranking public officials and private individuals who allegedly falsified documents to cause the payment of PHP 6.4M for fictitious repairs and purchases. Among the 19 individuals charged is the petitioner, who is a supplier and the owner of DEB Repair Shop and Parts. Dela Cruz allegedly supplied spare parts for DPWH service vehicles.

    The prosecution presented several disbursement vouchers (DV) where DEB was the supplier for emergency repairs and reimbursements. They also presented witnesses who were DPWH employees who were issued with service vehicles and were presented by DEB with a DV for payments and repairs when none were done to his service vehicle.

Issue: 

    W/N the Sandiganbayan committed error when it found petitioners guilty of the crime of estate and violation of RA 3019.

Held: The petition is denied.

    The Court is not a trier of facts, and its appellate jurisdiction is limited only to questions of law. Therefore, the Sandiganbayan's factual findings are conclusive upon the Court.

    The following elements of estafa under Par 2(1)A315 of the RPC are present in this case:

1. There must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means

There were false pretenses, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means in that it was made to appear, through the use of the falsified documents, that the DPWH service vehicles in question underwent emergency repairs that required purchases of spare parts, and that reimbursements were due to accused Martinez

2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud

The false pretenses, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means, in the form of falsification of documents, were employed prior to the commission of the fraud; that is to deceive the government in paying the claims for the fictitious emergency repairs/purchases of spare parts;

3. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his money or property because ofthe false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means; and

The government was induced to pay the claims relying on the false pretenses, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means employed;

4. That as a result thereof, the offended pai1y suffered damage.

The government suffered damages in the total amount of P5,166,539.00, the sum total of the false claims paid.

    Contrary to petitioner Borje's argument, the prosecution was able to establish that there were fictitious emergency repairs and/or purchases of spare pai1s. The prosecution presented several witnesses that testified they were end-users ofthe subject service vehicles, and they had not authorized the emergency repairs and/or purchases ofspare parts as described in the DVs and supporting documents prepared by the accused public officers and employees.

    The absence of participation or knowledge, on the part of the end-users is apparent on the supporting documents as they are not named the payee in most, if not all, DVs and supporting documents pertaining to their respective service vehicles. Instead, the DVs and supporting documents were in the name of some of the accused public officers/employees, such as Martinez and petitioner Borje.

    The falsification by the accused of the DVs, supporting documents and Cash Invoices had a vital connection to the chain of conspiracy or were in furtherance of the objective of the conspiracy. Without the DVs, supporting documents and Cash Invoices, the government would not have released public funds for the reimbursement of the ghost emergency repairs and/or purchase of spare parts. 

    The following are the elements of corrupt practices of public officers (Sec 3(e) of RA 3019):

1. the accused must be a public officer discharging administrative, judicial or official functions; 

Accused Arias, Borje, Castillo, Favorito, Quarto and San Jose are undoubtedly public officers discharging administrative or official functions.

2. he must have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence; and

All the aforementioned accused, in conspiracy with one another and with accused Dela Cruz, acted with evident bad faith in falsifying official documents to deceive the DPWH into paying the claims for the fictitious emergency repairs/purchases ofspare parts in the name of deceased accused Martinez.

3. his action caused undue injury to any party, including the government, or gave any private party unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his functions

The actions of the accused caused undue injury or damage to the government in the amount of PHP 5.1M

    Petitioner is in conspiracy with the other co-accused. Without the participation of petitioner Dela Cruz in the falsification of Cash Invoices through her sole proprietorship DEB, the reimbursements amounting to PHP 5.1M would not have been facilitated. Thus, since petitioner Dela Cruz is in conspiracy with the other co-accused, it is of no moment that she is not a public officer.