People vs. Concepcion

A conviction for estafa under subsection 5 of article 535 of the Penal Code may be sustained even where the information expressly charges only an infraction of subsection 1, provided the facts set forth in the information are sufficient to support the charge under subsection 5. The Court held that where the facts are sufficiently alleged in the information, the precise statutory subsection under which the offense falls may be determined by the evidence, and a variance between the form of estafa charged and that proved does not invalidate the conviction.

Miguel G. Concepcion was a resident of the Province of Cagayan, a representative of said province in the Philippine Assembly, and manager of a limited partnership engaged in buying and selling tobacco in the Cagayan Valley, known as "Puno y Concepcion." Teodorico Angeles was manager of the Aparri branch of the Philippine National Bank. Concepcion was the son of Venancio Concepcion, then president of the Philippine National Bank at Manila. By reason of both social and business relations, Concepcion acquired an undue influence over Angeles, with the result that Angeles surrendered his discretion as bank manager to Concepcion's will. In October 1919, Concepcion needed funds that could only be obtained from the bank, and having no bankable security available, recourse was had to obtaining loans upon fictitious warehouse receipts with the knowledge and connivance of Angeles.

Miguel G. Concepcion, a resident of Cagayan Province and representative of said province in the Philippine Assembly, was manager of "Puno y Concepcion," a limited partnership engaged in buying and selling tobacco in the Cagayan Valley. Teodorico Angeles was manager of the Aparri branch of the Philippine National Bank. Concepcion, being the son of the bank's president, acquired undue influence over Angeles, causing the latter to surrender his discretion as bank manager to Concepcion's will.

In October 1919, Concepcion needed funds obtainable only from the bank, and having no bankable security, the expedient of obtaining loans upon fictitious warehouse receipts (quedans) was adopted with the knowledge and connivance of Angeles. Abelardo Crisologo, an intimate friend of Concepcion who lived in Tuguegarao, and Ricardo Paredes, Crisologo's father-in-law and an employee of "Puno y Concepcion," were drawn into the scheme. During a dinner at Crisologo's house in Tuguegarao, Concepcion told Angeles that he had three thousand quintals of tobacco in the pueblos of Enrile, Peñablanca, and Baggao, which he wished to pledge to the bank but did not want his name to appear on the documents. Concepcion indicated Crisologo as a person who might figure as borrower. Crisologo initially hesitated but yielded after Concepcion pointed out that he would not appear as owner of the tobacco but merely as depositary, and Angeles assured him the participation was a matter of pure form. Concepcion explained that he wanted to use the money to purchase tobacco in competition with "Puno y Concepcion" and thought it would look ugly for his name to appear in connection with the loan.

The next day, the three met again, and it was determined that a loan of P35,000 would be made on the security of a quedan signed by Crisologo for 2,000 quintals of tobacco, with a further loan of P20,000 to be effected later on another quedan for the remaining thousand quintals. Angeles assured Crisologo that he had personally inspected the warehouse and found the tobacco to be there as claimed. The documents consisted of four promissory notes totaling P35,000, signed by Crisologo, payable to the bank, purportedly secured by a quedan for 2,000 quintals of tobacco. The quedan was reduced to typewritten form by Concepcion himself on his own typewriting machine, its contents dictated by Angeles. On October 24, 1919, in Aparri, Angeles discounted the four notes and placed the proceeds to the credit of an individual account opened in Crisologo's name. Of this amount, P30,000 was remitted to Concepcion in Tuguegarao by telegraph through the provincial treasurer; the remaining P5,000 was used to pay charges incidental to the loan and interest.

Three or four weeks later, the remaining P20,000 was advanced upon two promissory notes of P10,000 each, signed by Crisologo, purportedly secured by a quedan for the other thousand quintals of tobacco supposedly in Baggao. Paredes, who had informed Concepcion that "Puno y Concepcion" had need of money, was instructed by Concepcion to receive the proceeds; Angeles delivered to Paredes P500 in currency and a draft for P18,000, totaling P18,500, charged to Crisologo's account, with the remainder consumed by charges and interest. Although Crisologo signed the notes and quedans, he in no wise profited by the transaction and never saw any of the loan proceeds. At the time the quedans were signed and delivered, neither Crisologo nor Concepcion possessed the tobacco purported to be on deposit, and the evidence, though circumstantial, established that Angeles knew the tobacco was non-existent. The notes were never paid by Crisologo, the tobacco was found to be non-existent, Concepcion denied all responsibility, and Angeles committed suicide on December 23, 1921.

N/A — The decision does not recount the specific arguments raised by the appellant on appeal.

N/A — The decision does not recount the specific arguments raised by the appellee beyond the general position that the conviction should be affirmed.

• Variance Between Charge and Proof: Whether the conviction for estafa under subsection 5 of article 535 of the Penal Code can be sustained when the information expressly charged only an infraction of subsection 1 of the same article.
• Propriety of the Penalty: Whether the penalty imposed by the trial court was correct in light of the applicable provisions of the Penal Code.

• Variance Between Charge and Proof: Yes. Where the facts are sufficiently set forth in the information, a conviction can be had under subsection 5 of article 535, although the information expressly charges only an infraction of subsection 1, in conformity with the analogy of numerous precedents.
• Propriety of the Penalty: No, the penalty was one day short of the true legal requirement. The accused was subject to punishment under article 301 of the Penal Code, as amended, in relation with article 89, and the period fixed by the trial judge fell short of the true legal requirement by one day; the penalty was modified by adding one day to place it within the maximum of the maximum degree of prision correccional.

• Variance Between Charge and Proof: The information charged an estafa founded upon deceit, alleging that the bank's money was obtained by false representation on the part of Crisologo that he was the owner of the tobacco covered by the quedans, a form defined in subsection 1 of article 535. However, because the responsible manager of the bank, who let the money out, knew that the tobacco was non-existent, the estafa committed could not be considered to have been of the precise form alleged. The offense was more properly considered as falling under subsection 5 of the same article, consisting of fraudulent misapplication of the funds of the bank by its manager. The Court noted that the facts set forth in the information were sufficient to sustain the charge in this aspect, and held, in conformity with the analogy of numerous precedents, that where the facts are sufficiently set forth in the information, a conviction can be had under subsection 5 although the information expressly charges only an infraction of subsection 1.

• Propriety of the Penalty: The estafa involved consisted in Angeles, as manager of the Aparri branch of the Philippine National Bank, converting, misappropriating, and misapplying about P55,000 of the bank's money upon security known to him to be wholly fictitious, for the benefit of Concepcion and to the prejudice of the bank, in contravention of subsection 5 of article 535 of the Penal Code. To the accomplishment of this estafa, the falsification of two warehouse receipts was a necessary prerequisite, and Concepcion participated in the falsification not only as author by induction as to both, but as the mechanical author of at least the first, having himself reduced the document to proper form upon his own typewriting machine at the dictation of Angeles. The accused was therefore subject to punishment under article 301 of the Penal Code, as amended, in relation with article 89. The trial judge was not in error in sentencing him to imprisonment within the limits of the maximum degree of prision correccional, but a precise estimate of the penalty showed that the period fixed fell short of the true legal requirement by one day, necessitating modification.

• Variance between charge and proof in criminal cases — Where the facts are sufficiently set forth in the information, a conviction can be had under a different subsection of the same penal provision than that expressly charged, provided the facts alleged support the offense as actually proved. The Court applied this doctrine to sustain a conviction under subsection 5 of article 535 of the Penal Code where the information expressly charged only subsection 1, because the facts alleged were sufficient to support the charge under subsection 5.

• Estafa through fraudulent misapplication (subsection 5, article 535, Penal Code) — The offense consists of a bank manager converting, misappropriating, or misapplying bank funds upon security known to him to be wholly fictitious, to the prejudice of the bank. The Court applied this provision where the bank manager knew the tobacco securing the loans was non-existent, making the offense one of fraudulent misapplication rather than deceit.

• Complex offense of estafa by means of falsification of mercantile documents — Where falsification of mercantile documents is a necessary prerequisite to the accomplishment of estafa, the resulting offense is the complex crime of estafa by means of falsification of mercantile documents, punishable under article 301 of the Penal Code, as amended, in relation with article 89.

• "However, in view of the fact that the responsible manager of the bank, who let the money out, knew that the tobacco was non-existent, the estafa committed cannot be considered to have been of the precise form alleged; and the offense is more properly to be considered as falling under subsection 5 of the same article, that is, as consisting of fraudulent misapplication of the funds of the bank by its manager." — This passage establishes the Court's recharacterization of the offense from estafa through deceit to estafa through fraudulent misapplication, which is central to the ratio decidendi.

• "Moreover, we note that the facts set forth in the information are sufficient to sustain the charge in this aspect; and we have no hesitancy in holding, in conformity with the analogy of numerous precedents, that where the facts are sufficiently set forth in the information, a conviction can be had under subsection 5 of article 535, although the information expressly charges only an infraction of subsection 1." — This passage articulates the doctrine on variance between the offense charged and the offense proved, permitting conviction under a different subsection where the facts alleged support it.

• "To the accomplishment of this estafa the falsification of two warehouse receipts was a necessary prerequisite; and the appellant Concepcion participated in the falsification of those documents not only as author by induction as to both, but in the fact that he was the mechanical author of at least the first, having himself reduced the document to proper from upon his own typewriting machine at the dictation of Teodorico Angeles." — This passage establishes Concepcion's participation in the falsification as both author by induction and mechanical author, supporting his conviction for the complex offense.

N/A — The decision refers to "the analogy of numerous precedents" but does not cite specific case names or citations.

• Article 535, subsection 5, Penal Code — Defines the offense of estafa consisting of the fraudulent misapplication of funds by a bank manager. The Court applied this provision where the bank manager knew the security was fictitious, recharacterizing the offense from subsection 1 (deceit) to subsection 5 (fraudulent misapplication).
• Article 535, subsection 1, Penal Code — Defines estafa through deceit, the form originally charged in the information. The Court found this provision inapplicable because the bank manager knew the tobacco was non-existent.
• Article 301, Penal Code, as amended — Provides the penalty for the complex offense of estafa by means of falsification of mercantile documents. The Court applied this provision in relation with article 89 to determine the proper penalty.
• Article 89, Penal Code — Relates to the application of penalties. The Court applied this provision in determining the proper period of imprisonment within the maximum degree of prision correccional.

Araullo, C. J., Malcolm, Avanceña, Villamor, Ostrand, Johns, and Romualdez, JJ., concurred.

N/A — No dissenting opinions are noted in the decision.