- Petitioner
- Florian G. Bautista
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. 233218
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Division
- First Division
- Decided
- March 15, 2023
Whether petitioner committed Estafa under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code or if the transaction constituted a simple loan agreement
Summary
This Supreme Court case involves the acquittal of Florian G. Bautista from Estafa charges under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code. Bautista borrowed P335,000 from complainant Luciana Nolasco in November 2002, allegedly to lend to officemates, and issued four postdated checks that later bounced. Both the Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals convicted her of Estafa, finding misappropriation of funds. However, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that the transaction was a simple loan agreement, not involving the trust, commission, or administration required for Estafa. The Court distinguished between civil liability arising from loan default and criminal liability for breach of trust. Since ownership passed to Bautista, no misappropriation occurred. While acquitted criminally, her civil liability for the loan amount was separately adjudicated in a related Bouncing Checks Law case, preventing double recovery.