ODON PECHO, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 111399
- Promulgated: 1994-11-14
- Ponente: Davide, Jr., J.
Doctrine
Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code (consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies are punishable) is applicable to offenses punished by special laws such as R.A. No. 3019, making attempted or frustrated stages punishable.
When only an offense under the RPC included within a special-law offense is established (here, attempted estafa by falsification), the accused may be validly convicted of that RPC offense and punished accordingly, applying relevant rules on complex crimes and penalties.
A prosecutor's sworn statement that a preliminary investigation has been conducted in the information suffices as certification; omission of detailed statements about notice and opportunity to submit evidence is not necessarily fatal.
Facts
Petitioner Odon Pecho, a customs guard, conspired with Jose Catre and others to defraud the government by exporting gold using a fictitious importer; the plot was foiled and the government was not actually deprived of customs duties.
The Sandiganbayan found the elements of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 present except for the element of actually causing undue injury to the government, rendering the act an attempted violation.
The Sandiganbayan initially held that the attempted or frustrated stage under Section 3(e) is punishable; the issues include whether attempted/frustrated Section 3(e) is punishable and whether petitioner may be convicted under the RPC for included offenses.
Procedural objection that the information lacked a detailed prosecutor's certification of notice and opportunity to submit evidence was rejected as the prosecutor's sworn statement that a preliminary investigation was conducted sufficed.
Issues
Whether the attempted or frustrated stage of the offense defined in Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 is punishable.
Whether an accused may nonetheless be convicted for an offense penalized by the Revised Penal Code that is included in the offense under R.A. No. 3019 when only the attempted stage of the latter is proven.
Whether the prosecutor's certification in the information was sufficient despite not stating expressly that the accused was informed of the complaint and afforded opportunity to submit controverting evidence.
Ruling
The Court held that attempted or frustrated felonies under Section 3(e) are punishable by applying Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code to special laws like R.A. No. 3019; therefore the attempted Section 3(e) is punishable.
Because only attempted estafa through falsification of documents under Articles 315 and 171 RPC was established, the petitioner was convicted of that complex crime and sentenced under the Indeterminate Sentence Law with the penalty range and fine specified.
The prosecutor's certification that 'a preliminary investigation has been conducted in this case' was sufficient to meet procedural requirements; the particular omissions were not fatal.
Keywords
G.R. No. 111399, Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan and People of the Philippines, Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Revised Penal Code, Criminal Case No. 14844, information, public officer, Customs Guard, manifest partiality, evident bad faith, conspiracy, confabulating, conniving, confederating, mutually helping one another, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously act, violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, as amended, Indeterminate Sentence Law, perpetual disqualification to hold public office