- Petitioner
- Dionisio Esguerra
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. L-14313
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Division
- En Banc
- Ponente
- Barrera, J.
- Decided
- July 26, 1960
Whether accused can be convicted of estafa under Article 315(3)(2)(a) when prosecution assured he was being charged under Article 315(1)(b), and…
Summary
This landmark case involved Dionisio Esguerra who was prosecuted for estafa after receiving P4,400.00 from Yu Yek Huy & Co. for copra delivery but failing to deliver. The case presented complex procedural issues when the Court of Appeals convicted Esguerra under Article 315(3)(2)(a) for false pretenses, despite prosecution's earlier assurance that he was being charged under Article 315(1)(b) for misappropriation. The Supreme Court En Banc reversed, holding that the information failed to adequately allege false pretenses and that convicting under a different provision than what was assured violated due process. The Court emphasized that an accused can only be convicted of an offense that is both properly charged and proved, and found the transaction to be a civil matter involving future delivery of copra rather than a criminal fraud.