FACTS:

The case involves a petition for review on certiorari filed by Jeng Evangelista against the decision of the Court of Appeals. The petitioner was convicted of estafa in Criminal Case No. Q-33252 and was sentenced to imprisonment and ordered to pay damages. The information alleged that the petitioner defrauded the complaining witness by inducing him to capitalize a card game with an alleged rich man from Bacolod City. The petitioner pleaded not guilty while his co-accused remained at large. According to the trial court, the petitioner introduced the complaining witness to the game of blackjack and baccarat, taught him cheating tricks and signals, and convinced him to deposit money with the assurance of winning using these techniques. However, during the game, the petitioner and his friends stopped giving the pre-arranged signals, causing the complaining witness to lose his money.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the petitioner is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa.

2. Whether the petitioner should be entitled to the provisions of Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code.

RULING:

1. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa.

2. The petitioner is entitled to the provisions of Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act 6127, and further amended by BP Blg. 85, provided he does not fall within the exceptions thereof.

PRINCIPLES:

• The crime of estafa can be committed by means of deceit, false pretenses, or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneous with the commission of the fraud.

• To be guilty of estafa, the accused must have induced the offended party to part with his money or property through deceit, false pretenses, or fraudulent acts.

• Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code provides for the provisions applicable to penalties in which certain circumstances are taken into account, such as good conduct allowances or the benefit of parole.