G.R. NO. 164545 - LORBE REBUCAN Y BALTAZAR, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the Court finds the accused LORBE BALTAZAR REBUCAN alias "BHING", guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Qualified Theft (13 counts) and hereby imposes upon her the following penalties: (1.) SIX (6) YEARS of Prision Correccional as the minimum to TEN (10) YEARS and EIGHT (8) months of Prision Mayor as the maximum, for Criminal Case Nos. 4625, 4626, 4629, 4630, 4635, 4636, 4637, 4638, and 4640; (2.) FIVE (5) YEARS of Prision Correccional as the minimum to TEN (10) YEARS and FOUR (4) MONTHS of Prision Mayor as the maximum, for Criminal Case Nos. 4631, 4632, 4633 and 4639. Moreover, the Court hereby orders the afore-named accused to pay the private complainant GRAZIA ATHENA ZAULDA the total amount of P4,561.45 as actual or compensatory damages. With costs against the accused. [23] Unyielding, the petitioner appealed the RTC Decision dated 6 November 2001 with the Court of Appeals. In its Decision dated 12 March 2004, the Court of Appeals affirmed with modifications the ruling of the RTC. [24] The modifications pertain only to the penalties imposed by the RTC, thus: IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the appealed decision is AFFIRMED, with modification that appellant is hereby sentenced to suffer indeterminate penalty of FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO (2) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of prision correcional , as minimum, to NINE (9) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of prision mayor , as maximum, for Criminal Cases Nos. 4625, 4626, 4629, 4630, 4635, 4636, 4637, 4638, and 4640; As to Criminal Cases Nos. 4631, 4632, 4633 and 4639, appellant is hereby sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of TWO (2) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of prision correccional , as minimum, to TEN (10) YEARS, TWO (2) MONTHS and TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS of prision mayor , as maximum. In all other respects, the appealed decision stands. [25] Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration [26] of the above-stated decision but the same was denied by the Court of Appeals in its Resolution dated 2 July 2004. Hence, on 30 August 2004, petitioner filed a Petition for Review before this Court raising the following issues for our consideration: I. WHETHER THE ACQUITTAL OF HEREIN PETITIONER FROM THE OTHER CHARGES HURLED AGAINST HER CONSTITUTES REASONABLE DOUBT TO WARRANT HER ACQUITTAL OF THE CRIMES SUBJECT OF THE PRESENT PETITION. II. WHETHER THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN CONVICTING HEREIN PETITIONER OF THE CRIMES CHARGED DESPITE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE ALLEGED FALSIFIER. III. WHETHER THE GUILT OF HEREIN PETITIONER HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. [27] Anent the first issue, petitioner contends that her acquittal in Criminal Cases No. 4627 and 4634 for Qualified Theft in the RTC, Branch 1, Kalibo, Aklan, [28] casts reasonable doubt on her guilt in the cases before the RTC, Branch 2, Kalibo, Aklan, which are the subject of the instant appeal; that there was no direct eyewitness to the alleged crimes imputed against her; and, that the c