CASE TITLE

Criminal Law 1 | January 26, 2004 | TINGA, J.

Nature of Case: Illegal Recruitment and Estafa (G.R. Nos. 114967-68 – January 26, 2004)
Digest maker: Ricasio, Gabriel M.
SUMMARY: CRSIPIN BILLABER y MATBANUA is accused of committing estafa and fraud against Raul
Durano y Jubal (Complainant), Elizabeth Genteroy y Evangelista, and Tesita Onza y Paala. Respondent is
accused of being an illegal recruiter providing aid* in acquiring jobs in the United States.
(let “aid” be defined as aid to processing the passport and corresponding employment documents)

DOCTRINE: Illegal Recruitment; Swindling a.k.a. Estafa; Double Jeopardy; Criminal Procedure

FACTS:
● That on April 1992, friends of Elizabeth Genteroy introduced accused, wherein the latter offered the
former aid* to acquire a job as a seamstress in the Unites States for a fee of P 40,000.00.
● That on the same setting, Ms. Genteroy was informed by the accused that the latter is also seeking for
a personal driver in the United States, which subsequently resulted to the former to later introduce
her interested friend Raul Durano, whom was then charged by the accused P 18,000.00 for similar
aid.
● That on May 3 and 4, 1992, Mr. Durano and Ms. Genteroy respectively paid amounts of P 18,000.00
and P10,000.00 respectively, the latter informing the accused that she will fulfill payment of balance at
the date of the two complainants, as well as other individuals’ departure set on the 23rd of July 1992.
● That sometime in the first week of June, Ms. Genteroy introduced the accused to Tersina Onza, a
seamstress. The accused offers Ms. Onza of managing a dress shop in California for a processing
fee of P 10,000.00 (paid). Due to Ms. Onza being a last minute addition to the group, accused, on a
latter date, asks for an additional of P 10,000.00 to hasten the processing of her papers.
● That on July 23, complainants show up at the airport, yet accused does not show up. On July 25,
Durano chances upon accused at the canteen Emilio Aguinaldo College in Manila, wherein a
commotion breaks out due when accused tried to break out from Mr. Durano. Both parties were then
brought to the United Nations Station of the Western Police District.
● That on February 24, 1994, accused is found guilty for large scale illegal recruitment and estafa by
RTC branch 52 of Manila
● Accused appeals mainly for double jeopardy (with other minor issues such as criminal procedure (for
the manner of arrest) and for the delay in trial (for the delay in trial in the MeTC of Manila).

ISSUE/S & RATION:

1. Illegal Recruitment in a large scale – RTC Manila: YES
a. (1) Offender has no license to recruit workers. (2) undertakes any activity of recruitment
and placement or prohibite practices (Art. 13 and 34 of Labor Code). (3) Act is
committed to three or more persons, individually or as a group. Malum prohibitum (wrong
as prohibited)
b. Fine of P 100,000.00 for Illegal Recruitment, Replenishment of paid amount totaling P
38,000.00 (Later on corrected to 18,000.00, because only for Durano’s case) to the
complainants with an interest of 6% (Later on corrected by the Supreme Court to 12%) per
annum until fully paid
2. Swindling a.k.a. Estafa (Art. 315 of RPC) – RTC Manila: YES
a. “Any person who shall defraud another . . .” Malum in se (wrong in itself)
b. Prision Correcional of Min: 1 year, 8 months, 21 days to Max: 5 years, 5 months, 11 days, and
to pay the costs. (Affirmed by the Supreme Court)
3. Double Jeopardy (Filed by appellant accessed) – Supreme Court: NO (Does not Apply)
a. Elements: (1) A first jeopardy must be attached prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy must
be validly terminated; and (3) the second jeopardy must be the for the same offense as that in
the first.
 b. Illegal recruitment and estafa are two different offenses; therefore does not fall under
Double jeopardy
RULING: Accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and is set to suffer the penalties as stated above.