- Petitioner
- George L. Tubb
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. L-9811
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Division
- En Banc
- Ponente
- Concepcion, J.
- Decided
- April 22, 1957
Whether accused can be convicted of estafa under Article 315(2)(a) when charged under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code, and sufficiency of…
Summary
George Tubb was entrusted with P6,000 by William Quasha to purchase rattan for a joint business venture. After receiving the money, Tubb disappeared and failed to account for the funds or deliver the promised rattan. The Court of Appeals convicted him of estafa through false pretenses under Article 315(2)(a), but the Supreme Court reversed this, holding that he could not be convicted of an offense not alleged in the information without violating his constitutional rights. However, the Supreme Court affirmed his conviction for embezzlement under Article 315(1)(b) as originally charged, finding that the evidence clearly showed misappropriation when Tubb admitted he could not explain what happened to the money and his pattern of disappearance demonstrated guilty conscience. The case establishes important precedent regarding the requirement that criminal convictions must match the charges in the information.