Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
17.1_People vs Romero

17.1_People vs Romero

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5 |Likes:
Published by Elaine Atienza

More info:

Published by: Elaine Atienza on Nov 29, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/12/2013

pdf

text

original

 
G.R. No. 112985 April 21, 1999PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
plaintiff-appelleevs.
MARTIN L. ROMERO and ERNESTO C. RODRIGUEZ,
accused-appellants
.
Ruiz was a radio commentator in Butuan City. He learned about the business of Surigao San Andres Industrial Development Corporation (SAIDECOR), when heinterviewed Romero and Rodriguez regarding the corporation's investmentoperations in Butuan City and Agusan del Norte. Romero was the president andgeneral manager of SAIDECOR, while Rodriguez was the operations manager.SAIDECOR started its operation as a marketing business. Later, it engaged insoliciting funds and investments from the public. The corporation guaranteed an800% return on investment within fifteen (15) or twenty one (21) days. Investorswere given coupons containing the capital and the return on the capital collectibleon the date agreed upon. It stopped operations in September, 1989.On September 14, 1989, Ruiz went to SAIDECOR office in Butuan City to make aninvestment. After handing over the amount of P150k to Rodriguez, Ruiz received apostdated check instead of the usual redeemable coupon.
The check indicated P1,000,200.00 as the amount in words, but the amount in figures was for P1,200,000.00, as the return on the investment.
Ruiz did not notice thediscrepancy.When the check was presented to the bank for payment on October 5, 1989, it wasdishonored for insufficiency of funds, as evidenced by the check return slip issuedby the bank. Romero and Rodriguez could not be located and demand for paymentwas made only sometime in November 1989 during the preliminary investigation of this case. Romero and Rodriguez responded that they had no money.Romero and Rodriguez were both convicted for the crime of estafa. They claimedthat they had sufficient funds in the bank, but it was dishonored because what wasrecognized was the amount in figures (P1,200,000.00) instead of the amount inwords (P1,000,200.00).
ISSUE:
W/N the court erred in convicting Romero and Rodriguez on the basis of thedishonored check
HELD:
No. There is no merit in this appeal. We sustain accused-appellant'sconviction.
RATIO:
Accused-appellant relies on the fact that there was a discrepancy between theamount in words and the amount in figures in the check that was dishonored. Theamount in words was P1,000,200.00, while the amount in figures wasP1,200,000.00. It is admitted that the corporation had in the bank P1,144,760.00 onSeptember 28, 1989, and P1,124,307.14 on April 2, 1990. The check was presented

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->