PEOPLE V.

ORTIZ-MIYAKE FACTS: Lanie Ortiz-Miyake was charged with illegal recruitment in large scale, following a complaint filed by Elenita Marasigan, Imelda Generillo and Rosamar del Rosario. Marasigan had also charged her with estafa by means of false pretenses. Only Marasigan was able to testify, however, as the other two complainants were abroad. Marasigan said Ortiz-Miyake promised her a job as factory worker in Taiwan. The former gave her P5,000 initially as placement fee, which amount subsequently became P23,000 paid in installments upon the demands of the accused. Accused gave assurances that Marasigan would have no problem getting a visa and a plane ticket. She was unable to go to Taiwan, as there was no ticket booked for her and, in fact, the supposed agency did not even know Miyake. On the other hand, Generillo was represented by her mother, while del Rosarios sister testified in court on the latters behalf. As they were not personally present, however, during the transactions with Miyake, they could only claim they gave certain amounts that were supposed to go to Miyake, and concluded that since their relatives had not been able to leave as promised by Miyake, then they were necessarily victims of illegal recruitment by the accused. A POEA representative also testified that Miyake had no authorization to recruit workers for overseas employment. [Miyake claiming she only offered discounted plane tickets to the supposed victims] TC convicted the accused, largely basing their decision on the previous decision rendered by Paranaque MeTC, where the two complainants now absent had filed charges of estafa against Miyake. The Court there had convicted Miyake. ISSUE: won Miyake can be held liable for illegal recruitment on a large scale HELD/RATIO: Ortiz-Miyake guilty only of simple illegal recruitment (and estafa). LC: RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT IS ". . . ANY ACT OF CANVASSING, ENLISTING, CONTRACTING TRANSPORTING,
UTILIZING, HIRING OR PROCURING WORKERS AND INCLUDES REFERRALS, CONTRACT SERVICES, PROMISING OR ADVERTISING FOR EMPLOYMENT, LOCALLY OR ABROAD, WHETHER FOR PROFIT OR NOT; BECOMES ILLEGAL IF ONE HAS NO AUTHORIZATION FOR PERFORMING SUCH ACTS; BECOMES LARGE SCALE IF DONE AGAINST THREE OR MORE PERSONS WHETHER INDIVIDUALLY OR AS A GROUP

Right of accused to confront del Rosario and Generillo was not afforded her. Testimonies of sister and mother, respectively, mere hearsay. Although testimonies from the previous case could have been used, the decision convicting the accused of another crime (in that previous case, estafa) cannot be sustained for being violative of the accuseds right to confront witnesses. Conviction of illegal recruitment does not preclude conviction for estafa. Burden of proof was only successfully established as to victim Marasigan. Since large scale not established, conviction is only for simple illegal recruitment (and estafa).