Case #1

Galvez vs. Court of Appeals G.R No. L-22760 November 29, 1971

Doctrine: the Supreme Court stated that “the existence of such trust and commission or
administration is an essential element of Estafa by misappropriation or conversion.”

Facts: This present case was filed by Petitioner Galvez by certiorari on the decision of the Regional trial
Court of Rizal charging Galvez of the crime of Estafa which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

In the year of 1959, Galvez made a transaction with the spouses Camara specifically an exchange deal
for the spouse’s car. Upon negotiation, Galvez showed the first offered car which the spouses rejected.
The second car Galvez presented in the Clark Field air base to spouses Camara has been accepted by the
latter. After the presentation of the offered car, spouses Camara asked for an estimate of the taxes and
duties they need to pay to settle the legal papers of the car before acquisition. Galvez then now offered
his service and he presented himself that he can settle the tax liabilities by the application of backpay
certificates which he asked for 2,000.00 pesos as the needed money for settling the said liabilities. The
spouses issued a bank checked amounting to 2,000.00 pesos which was received by Galvez and cashed
the check in the Philippine Trust Company in Manila. However, the spouses Camara found out that the
tax liabilities which Galvez allegedly settled is not true. After verification, the information entry 663582
is not tally on the entry number in the files of Bureau of Customs. He asked Galvez to return the money
but Galvez replied that he appropriated the money and had given it to other person.

In the present petition, Galvez states that he was denied the right to be heard and he is assailing the
jurisdiction of the court to decide the case.

Issue/s: Whether or not he is guilty of the crime of Estafa;

Whether or not he was denied the right to be heard and to present evidence to the court

Held: The Court of appeals affirmation regarding the decision of the Regional Trial Court is meritorious.
The evidence presented in the trial court established the fact that Petitioner Galvez is guilty of
committing the crime of Estafa beyond reasonable doubt. The trust that both parties established
because of the offer made by the Petitioner prompted the Spouses Camara to trust Galvez on settling
the tax liabilities which they paid the amount of 2,000.00 pesos upon which Galvez appropriated it to his
own benefit. It was mentioned by the Supreme Court that the existence of such trust and commission
or administration is an essential element of Estafa by misappropriation or conversion. In this case, the
trust was established and the misappropriation committed by Galvez.

The Supreme Court also affirmed the decision that the Court of Appeals was correct that the Petitioner
was not denied the right to be heard and to present evidence to the court; that the 2 years period were
more than enough to the said claim. The Supreme Court stated that the modification and adjustment of
the dates should be anticipated by the Petitioner’s counsel as they are present in fact, it was adjusted
because of his counsel was absent on the set date.
ACCORDINGLY, we affirm the decision of the respondent Court of Appeals dated March 7, 1964 and
consequently deny the petitioner's motion for new trial. Costs again the petitioner.