Petitioner
Macario Embuscado y Dayunot
Respondent
People
Citation
G.R. No. L-38984
Court
Supreme Court
Division
Second Division
Ponente
Paras, J.
Decided
November 24, 1989

Whether an accused charged with estafa can be convicted of the crime of theft; constitutional due process violation in variance between charge and…

Summary

Macario Embuscado, a tenant, was charged with estafa for harvesting and selling 320 mangoes without his landlord's consent. The City Court convicted him of estafa, but the Court of First Instance changed his conviction to theft on appeal. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that an accused cannot be convicted of a crime different from what was charged, as this violates constitutional due process rights. The Court reinstated the estafa conviction but modified the penalty to 3 months and 11 days of arresto mayor, emphasizing that theft is not included in the crime of estafa and that variance between charge and conviction denies the accused's right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.

Statutes applied

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Featured in research

In-depth Intellegal research that discusses this case.

Common questions

Plain-language Q&A on the issues in this case.

By Intellegal Editorial Board · November 24, 1989

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.