Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 59 views

    11 People vs. Hernandez

    Uploaded by

    Ako Si Paula Monghit
    The accused were charged with syndicated and large scale illegal recruitment and estafa based on eight informations filed by one applicant. The accused argued they could not be convicted of large scale illegal recruitment based on one applicant. The Supreme Court ruled that while it was not large scale, the accused could still be guilty of illegal recruitment by a syndicate. The court also ruled the accused were guilty of estafa, as they falsely claimed to have the capacity to send workers abroad, induced the applicant to pay fees, but lacked authority to recruit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    11 People vs. Hernandez

    Uploaded by

    Ako Si Paula Monghit
    59 views1 page
    The accused were charged with syndicated and large scale illegal recruitment and estafa based on eight informations filed by one applicant. The accused argued they could not be convicted of large scale illegal recruitment based on one applicant. The Supreme Court ruled that while it was not large scale, the accused could still be guilty of illegal recruitment by a syndicate. The court also ruled the accused were guilty of estafa, as they falsely claimed to have the capacity to send workers abroad, induced the applicant to pay fees, but lacked authority to recruit.

    Original Title

    11-People-vs.-Hernandez.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The accused were charged with syndicated and large scale illegal recruitment and estafa based on eight informations filed by one applicant. The accused argued they could not be convicted of large scale illegal recruitment based on one applicant. The Supreme Court ruled that while it was not large scale, the accused could still be guilty of illegal recruitment by a syndicate. The court also ruled the accused were guilty of estafa, as they falsely claimed to have the capacity to send workers abroad, induced the applicant to pay fees, but lacked authority to recruit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    59 views1 page

    11 People vs. Hernandez

    Uploaded by

    Ako Si Paula Monghit
    The accused were charged with syndicated and large scale illegal recruitment and estafa based on eight informations filed by one applicant. The accused argued they could not be convicted of large scale illegal recruitment based on one applicant. The Supreme Court ruled that while it was not large scale, the accused could still be guilty of illegal recruitment by a syndicate. The court also ruled the accused were guilty of estafa, as they falsely claimed to have the capacity to send workers abroad, induced the applicant to pay fees, but lacked authority to recruit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    141221-36 March 7, 2002

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,


    vs.
    FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (at large), KARL REICHL, and YOLANDA GUTIERREZ DE REICHL, accused,
    KARL REICHL and YOLANDA GUTIERREZ DE REICHL, accused-appellants

    FACTS: Eight (8) informations for syndicated and large scale illegal recruitment and eight (8)
    informations for estafa were filed against accused-appellants and Hernandez. The evidence of the
    prosecution consisted of testimonies of private complainants and a certification from POEA that the
    accused were neither licensed nor authorized by POEA to recruit workers for overseas employees.

    Accused contended that they could not be convicted for large scale illegal recruitment based on several
    information filed by only one applicant.

    ISSUE:

    1. Whether on not they were guilty of illegal recruitment even if several informations were filed
    by only one applicant.

    2. Whether or not accused-appeallants can be also held guilty of the crime of estafa.

    RULING:

    1. Yes, they were guilty of illegal recruitment. The Supreme Court held that where only one
    complainant filed several complaints, there is no illegal recruitment in large scale, but the
    conspiring recruiters can be held guilty of illegal recruitment by a syndicate.

    2. Yes, they were also guilty of the crime of estafa. A person who is convicted of illegal recruitment
    may, in addition, be convicted of estafa under Art. 315 (2) of the Revised Penal Code provided
    the elements of estafa are present. Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal
    Code is committed by any person who defrauds another by using a fictitious name, or falsely
    pretends to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or
    imaginary transactions, or by means of similar deceits executed prior to or simultaneously with
    the commission of the fraud. The offended party must have relied on the false pretense,
    fraudulent act or fraudulent means of the accused-appellant and as a result thereof, the
    offended party suffered damages. It has been proved in this case that accused-appellants
    represented themselves to private complainants to have the capacity to send domestic helpers
    to Italy, although they did not have any authority or license. It is by this representation that they
    induced private complainants to pay a placement fee of P150,000.00. Such act clearly
    constitutes estafa under Article 315 (2) of the Revised Penal Code.

    You might also like