CARMEN LIWANAG v. CA

FACTS:

Petitioner Carmen Liwanag was charged with estafa for defrauding Isidora Rosales. Under their agreement, Rosales gave cash advances to Liwanag and another person for the purpose of buying and selling cigarettes. Liwanag and her companion made periodic visits to Rosales to report on the progress of the transactions, but eventually stopped visiting. Rosales filed a case of estafa against Liwanag. After trial, the regional trial court found Liwanag guilty and sentenced her to an indeterminate penalty. The decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the contract between the petitioner and the complainant was of a partnership or joint venture, or a simple loan, such that the non-return of the money would be a civil matter rather than criminal.

  2. Whether the petitioner should be acquitted on grounds of reasonable doubt by applying the "equipoise rule".

RULING:

  1. The contract between the petitioner and the complainant was not of a partnership, joint venture, or a simple loan. The money delivered to the petitioner was for a specific purpose (to purchase cigarettes), and if unsold, to return the money to the complainant. Misappropriation of such money constitutes estafa.

  2. The petitioner should not be acquitted on grounds of reasonable doubt because the elements of estafa are clearly present: (a) abuse of confidence in defrauding another, and (b) damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation caused to the offended party.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Estafa: A crime where a person defrauds another by causing damage through unfaithfulness, abuse of confidence, false pretenses, or fraudulent acts.

  2. Elements of Estafa:

    • The accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or deceit;

    • Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third party;

    • Presence of a fiduciary relation in the form of trust, commission, or administration.

  3. Misappropriation Under Estafa: When money or property is received by a partner or individual for a specific purpose and later misappropriated, the person is guilty of estafa.

  4. Contract of Loan vs. Specific Purpose Delivery: In a contract of loan, once money is received by the debtor, ownership transfers to the recipient, who can then dispose of it as they wish. If money is delivered for a specific purpose but not utilized as intended, and ownership is not transferred, it constitutes conversion under estafa.