THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 198391. September 23, 2020.]
DAVID JOHN ROBERT THOMAS, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated September 23, 2020, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 198391 (David John Robert Thomas v. People of the Philippines). — After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for review for failure of petitioner to prove that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its January 14, 2011 Decision 1 and August 24, 2011 Resolution 2 in CA-G.R. CR No. 30707 which affirmed the January 18, 2007 Judgment 3 of the Regional Trial Court, Parañaque City, Branch 274 (RTC), finding petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of estafa.
A Petition for Review on Certiorari should raise only issues of law, and not of fact. The Court defers and accords finality to the factual findings of trial courts especially when such findings are undisturbed by the appellate court. 4 While there are exceptions to this rule, 5 petitioner failed to substantiate and prove that this case falls under any of these exceptions.
While the factual findings of the CA are proper, We shall modify the penalties imposed against petitioner.
Based on the records, petitioner had defrauded private complainant in the amount of US$80,000.00 or an equivalent of P2,168,021.70 as of May 1993. 6 Pursuant to Republic Act No. 10951, 7 the penalty prescribed for estafa where the amount defrauded is over One Million Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P1,200,000.00) but does not exceed Two Million Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (P2,400,000.00), is prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law and there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance, 8 the imposable penalty should be that of imprisonment of two (2) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor as minimum to one (1) year, eight (8) months, and twenty-one (21) days of prision correccional as maximum.
Finally, We sustain the award of moral damages in the sum of P100,000.00 in favor of private complainant due to the emotional suffering, mental stress and financial hardship that she and her family experienced in Canada due to petitioner's fraudulent maneuvering. Article 2229 of the Civil Code provides that "exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages." Hence, in addition to the award of compensatory or actual damages, We also impose the award of exemplary damages in the amount of P50,000.00.
WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES the petition for review for lack of merit; AFFIRMS with MODIFICATION the January 14, 2011 Decision and August 24, 2011 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 30707; IMPOSES the penalty of an indeterminate sentence of two (2) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor as minimum to one (1) year, eight (8) months, and twenty-one (21) days of prision correccional as maximum; ORDERS the petitioner TO PAY the amounts of US$80,000.00 as actual damages, P100,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, all subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this judgment until full payment. 9
Costs against petitioner.
SO ORDERED." (J. Zalameda, on wellness leave.)
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, (Vol. I) pp. 10-32; penned by Associate Justice Ruben C. Ayson, with Associate Justices Normandie B. Pizarro and Ricardo R. Rosario, concurring.
2.Id. at 34; penned by Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario, with Associate Justices Sesinando E. Villon and Normandie B. Pizarro, concurring.
3.Id. at (Vol. II) 599-626; CA rollo, pp. 39-65; penned by Presiding Judge Fortunito L. Madrona.
4.Heirs of Spouses Liwagon and Dumalagan v. Heirs of Spouses Liwagon and Liwagon, 748 Phil. 675, 689 (2014).
5.Philippine Independent Church v. Basañes, G.R. No. 220220, August 15, 2018, citing Dr. Seriña v. Caballero, 480 Phil. 277, 284-285 (2004), and Land Bank of the Phils. v. Monet's Export & Mfg. Corp., 493 Phil. 327, 338-339 (2005).
6. US$ to Php Peso exchange rate = 27.100271. Sourced at http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/speiy_02/uscross_9302.htm
7. "An Act Adjusting the Amount or the Value of Property and Damage on Which a Penalty is Based and the Fines Imposed under the Revised Penal Code, Amending for the Purpose Act No. 3815, Otherwise Known as 'The Revised Penal Code,' as Amended."
8. REVISED PENAL CODE, Art. 64, par. 1 states that: "When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period."
9.Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267 (2013).