06 - Agbanlog v People

People vs Sendaydiego, et. al. G.R. No. L-33254 and 33253 January 20, !"# FACTS Accused Corpuz received from complaia! Ta"co# Ta"co# pieces of $e%elr#  %i!& a o'li"a!io !o sell !&e same same ad remi! !&e proceeds of !&e sale or !o re!ur !&e same if o! sold( af!er !&e e)pira!io of *+ da#s, T&e period e)pired %i!&ou! Corpuz remi!!i" a#!&i" !o Ta"co#, -&e Corpuz ad Ta"co# me!( Corpuz promised !&a! &e %ill pa#( 'u! !o o avail, Ta"co# Ta"co# filed a case for es!afa %i!& a'use of cofidece a"ais! Corpuz, Corpuz ar"ued as follo%s. follo%s. a, T&e proof s u'mi!!ed '# Ta"co# receip!0 is iadmissi'le for 'ei" a mere p&o!ocop#, ', T&e iforma!io %as defec!ive 'ecause !&e da!e %&e !&e $e%elr# s&ould 'e re!ured ad !&e da!e %&e crime occurred is differe! from !&e oe !es!ified !o '# Ta"co#, c, Four!& eleme! of es!afa or demad is o! proved, d, Sole !es!imo# of Ta"co# is o! sufficie! for covic!io

ISSUE -/N Ca !&e cour! admi! as evidece a p&o!ocop# of docume! %i!&ou! viola!i" !&e 'es! evidece rule ol# ori"ial docume!s( as a "eeral rule( is admissi'le as evidece01 Is !&e da!e of occurrece of !ime ma!erial i es!afa cases %i!& a'use of cofidece1

RULING / HELD 2es, T&e es!a'lis&ed doc!rie is !&a! %&e a par!# failed !o i!erpose a !imel# o'$ec!io !o evidece a! !&e !ime !&e# %ere offered i evidece( suc& o'$ec!io s&all 'e cosidered as %aived, Here( Corpuz ever o'$ec!ed !o !&e admissi'ili!# of !&e said evidece a! !&e !ime i! %as ide!ified( mar3ed ad !es!ified upo i cour! '# Ta"co#, Corpuz also failed !o raise a o'$ec!io i &is Comme! !o !&e prosecu!io4s formal offer of evidece ad eve admi!!ed &avi" si"ed !&e said receip!, No, I! is !rue !&a! !&e "ravame of !&e crime of es!afa %i!& a'use of cofidece uder Ar!icle *56( para"rap& 5( su'para"rap& su'para"rap& '0 of !&e R7C is !&e appropria!io or coversio of moe# or proper!# received !o !&e pre$udice of !&e o%er ad !&a! !&e !ime of occurrece is o! a ma!erial i"redie! of !&e c rime, Hece( !&e e)clusio of !&e period ad !&e %ro" da!e of !&e occurrece of !&e crime( as reflec!ed i !&e Iforma!io( do o! ma3e !&e la!!er fa!all# defec!ive, Fur!&er( !&e follo%i" sa!isfies !&e sufficiec# of iforma!io. 5, T&e desi"a!io of !&e offese '# !&e s !a!u!e8 9, T&e ac!s or omissios complaied of as cos!i!u!i" !&e offese8 *, T&e ame of !&e offeded par!#8 ad :, T&e appro)ima!e !ime of !&e commissio of !&e offese( ad !&e place %&erei !&e offese %as commi!!ed, T&e :!& eleme! is sa!isfied, Eve !&ou"& !&e iforma!io idica!es !&a! !&e !ime of offese %as commi!!ed ;o or a'ou! !&e 6!& of suc& is o! fa!al !o !&e prosecu!io4s cause cosideri" !&a! Sec!io 55 of !&e same Rule re?uires a s !a!eme! of !&e precise !ime ol# %&e !&e same is a ma!erial i"redie! of !&e offese, -&a! is !&e form of demad re?uired i es!afa %i!& a'use of cofidece1 No!e firs! !&a! !&e eleme!s of es!afa %i!& a'use of cofidece are as follo%s. a0 !&a! moe#( "oods or o!&er persoal proper!# is received '# !&e offeder i !rus!( or o commissio( or for admiis!ra!io( or uder a# o!&er o'li"a!io ivolvi" !&e du!# !o ma3e deliver# of( or !o re!ur !&e same8 '0 !&a! !&ere 'e misappropria!io or coversio of suc& moe# or proper!# '# !&e offeder or deial o &is par! of suc& receip!8 c0 ! &a! suc& misappropria!io or coversio or deial is !o !&e pre$udice of ao!&er8 ad d0 !&a! !&ere is a demad made '# !&e offeded par!# o !&e offeder, offeder, No specific !#pe of proof is re?uired !o s&o% !&a! !&ere %as demad, Demad eed o! eve 'e formal8 i! ma# 'e ver'al, T&e s pecific %ord ;demad> eed o! eve 'e used !o s&o% !&a! i! &as ideed 'ee made upo !&e perso c&ar"ed( sice eve a mere ?uer# as !o !&e %&erea'ou!s of !&e moe# @i !&is case( proper!#( %ould 'e !a!amou! !o a demad, I Tu'' v, 7eople( %&ere !&e complaia! merel# ver'all# i?uired a'ou! !&e moe# e!rus!ed !o !&e accused( !&e ?uer# %as !a!amou! !o a demad, Ba# a sole %i!ess 'e cosidered credi'le1 2es, No!e firs! !&a! se!!led is !&e rule !&a! i assessi" !&e cr edi'ili!# of %i!esses( SC "ives "rea! respec! !o !&e evalua!io of !&e !rial cour! for i! &ad !&e ui?ue oppor!ui!# !o o'serve !&e demeaor of %i!esses ad !&eir depor!me! o !&e %i!ess s!ad( a oppor!ui!# deied !&e appella!e cour!s( %&ic& merel# rel# o !&e records of !&e case,  T&e assessme! '# !&e !rial cour! is eve coclusive ad 'idi" if o! !ai!ed %i!& ar'i!rariess or oversi"&! of some fac! or c ircums!ace of %ei"&! ad ifluece( especiall# %&e suc& fidi" is affirmed '# !&e CA, Tru!& is es!a'lis&ed o! '# !&e um'er of %i!esses( 'u! '# !&e ?uali!# of !&eir !es!imoies( for i de!ermii" !&e value ad credi'ili!# of evidece( !&e %i!esses are !o 'e %ei"&ed o! um'ered,

People vs Sendaydiego, et. al. G.R. No. L-33254 and 33253 January 20, !"#

People vs Sendaydiego, et. al. G.R. No. L-33254 and 33253 January 20, !"#