G.R. No. 185277 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. RODOLFO GALLO, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered as follows: I. The judgment of the trial court in Criminal Case No. 02-200788 finding the accused-appellant Rodolfo Gallo guilty of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and sentencing him to life imprisonment, as well as to pay a fine of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos is AFFIRMED. The judgments in Criminal Cases Nos. 02-200803 and 02-200812 sentencing the accused-appellant to suffer an indeterminate prison term of four (4) years, two (2) months of prision correccional to ten (10) years of prision mayor is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATION: In additional to the P45,000.00 each to be paid by the accused-appellant to Ian Fernandez and Reynaldo Panlilio as actual damages; the accussed-appellant is also ordered to pay legal interest on the said amount of P45,000.00 from the time of the filing of the Information until fully paid. II. The judgment in Criminal Case No. 02-200810 finding the accused-appellant guilty of estafa is MODIFIED, and the accused-appellant is hereby sentenced to an indeterminate penalty ranging from one (1) year, eight (8) months and twenty-one (21) days of prision correccional minimum to five (5) years, five (5) months and [eleven] (11) days of prision correccional maximum. The accused-appellant shall pay Zenaida Filomeno P20,000.00 by way of actual damages. In addition, the accused-appellant shall also pay legal interest on the said amount of P20,000.00 from the time of filing of the Information until fully paid. In all four cases, the accused-appellant Rodolfo Gallo shall be credited with the full extent of his preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code. Costs against accused-appellant. [47] Hence, the instant petition. On 21 January 2009, the Court resolved to require the parties to file their respective supplemental briefs, if they so desire, within thirty (30) days from notice. [48] Appellant filed a Manifestation dated 18 March 2009 stating that he will no longer file a supplemental brief and is adopting his Appellant's Brief as his Supplemental Brief. [49] The Office of the Solicitor General likewise manifested that it would no longer file a supplemental brief. [50] In his Brief, appellant assigns the following as errors committed by the trial court: I THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN GIVING MUCH WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE TESTIMONIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES. II THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF THREE COUNTS OF ESTAFA NOTWITHSTANDING THE PATENT ABSENCE OF CRIMINAL INTENT ON THE PART OF THE LATTER. III THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE ALL THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME CHARGED. [51] Appellant, in essence, claims that the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal must fail. We find no valid grounds to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the lower court's