THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 234013, June 16, 2021
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MITCHELLE VALENCIA Y DIZON AND JOANE SIMBILLO Y LAURETTI, Accused-Appellants.
D E C I S I O N
LEONEN, J.:
In cases involving trafficking in persons, a warrantless arrest following an entrapment operation is justified. Entrapment facilitates the in flagrante arrest of offenders and the rescue of trafficked victims. Corroborating testimonies of the arresting officer and the victim suffice to sustain conviction.
For this Court's resolution is an appeal1 challenging the Court of Appeals Decision,2 which affirmed the Regional Trial Court Decision3 in finding Mitchelle Valencia (Valencia) and Joane Simbillo (Simbillo) guilty of the crimes charged against them.
In eight Informations, Valencia and Simbillo were charged with committing acts of trafficking in persons penalized under Section 4(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, as amended by Republic Act No. 10364, or the Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012.4
The Information in Criminal Case No. 14-11900 charged Simbillo for offering AAA to foreigners for sexual exploitation:
That sometime in February 2014 and subsequently thereafter in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of AAA, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact, AAA was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.5
Criminal Case No. 14-11901
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of BBB, 13 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact BBB was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11902
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014 and sometime prior thereto, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of CCC, 14 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact CCC was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11903
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014 and sometime prior thereto, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of DDD, 13 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation' as in fact DDD was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, ano harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11904
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of EEE, 11 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact EEE was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11905
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of FFF, 14 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact FFF was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11906
That on or about tne 27th day of May 2014, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, by means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of GGG, 12 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact GGG was recruited, obtained, provided, offered, maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused and she was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.Criminal Case No. 14-11907
That on or about the 27th day of May 2014, in Angeles City, Pampanga, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring together and mutually aiding one another, ny means of threat, coercion, fraud, deception and by taking advantage of the vulnerability of HHH, 15 years old and born on xxx, who was in financial need, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously engaged in recruiting, obtaining, providing, offering, maintaining persons for prostitution and for sexual exploitation as in fact HHH was recruited, obtained, provided, offered maintained, and harboured by the above-named accused. HHH was required to engage in sexual activities with foreigners/clients for the amount of One Thousand Pesos in ANGELES CITY, to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.13
WHEREFORE, premises considered:
- In Criminal Case no. 14-11900, the court finds accused Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(a) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014.
Accordingly, accused Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis is hereby sentenced TO SUFFER the penalty of imprisonment of twenty (20) years and TO PAY a fine in the amount of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00).
Furthermore, accused Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis is hereby ordered TO INDEMNIFY private complainant AAA with nominal damages in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).- In Criminal Case no. 14-11901, the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014 for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They are hereby ACQUITTED of said charge.
- In Criminal Case no. 14-11902. the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joanc Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the information dated May 28, 2014.
Accordingly, accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis are hereby sentenced TO SUFFER the penalty of life imprisonment and TO PAY a fine in the amount of Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00) each.
Furthermore, accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis are hereby ordered TO INDEMNIFY private complainant CCC with nominal damages in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).- In Criminal Case no. 14-11903, the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014.
Accordingly accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey is hereby sentenced TO SUFFER the penalty of life imprisonment and TO PAY a fine in the amount of Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).
Furthermore, accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey is hereby ordered TO INDEMNIFY private complainant DDD with nominal damages in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).
In accordance with the discussion above in Criminal Case No. 14-11903 the court finds accused Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) cf Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014. She is hereby ACQUITTED on said charge.- In Criminal Case no. 14-11904, the court finds accused Mitchells Valencia y Dizon a k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation or Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No 10364; embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014 for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They are hereby ACQUITTED of said charge
- In Criminal Case no. 14-11905, the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014 for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They are hereby ACQUITTED of said charge.
- In Criminal Case no. 14-11906, the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey and Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014. They are hereby ACQUITTED of said charge.
- In Criminal Case no. 14-11907, the court finds accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(a) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364. embodied in the Information dated May 23, 2014.
Accordingly accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a.k.a. Ate Seysey is hereby sentenced TO SUFFER the penalty of imprisonment of twenty (20) years and TO PAY a fine in the amount of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00).
Furthermore, accused Mitchelle Valencia y Dizon a k.a. Ate Seysey is hereby ordered TO INDEMNIFY private complainant HHH with nominal damages in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00)
In accordance with the discussion above in Criminal Case No. 14-11907, the court finds accused Joane Simbillo y Lauretti a.k.a. Alexis NOT GUILTY of the offense of Violation of Section 4(a) in relation to Section 6(a) of Republic Act no. 9208 or Qualified Trafficking in Person penalized in Section 10(c) thereof, as amended by R.A. No. 10364, embodied in the Information dated May 28, 2014. She is hereby ACQUITTED of said charge.
No costs.
SO ORDERED.41
WHEREFORE, foregoing considered, the Decision dated 04 June 2015 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 59, Angeles City, is AFFIRMED.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
SO ORDERED.44 (Emphasis in the original)
SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. — As used in this Act.
(a) Trafficking in Persons — refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the persons, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The elements of trafficking in persons can be derived from its definition under Section 3 (a) of Republic Act No. 9208, thus:
(1) The act of "recruitment, transportation, transfer or harbouring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders."
(2) The means used which include "threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another["]; and
(3) The purpose of trafficking is exploitation which includes "exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs."59 (Citation omitted)
Under Republic Act No. 10364, the elements of trafficking in persons have been expanded to include the following acts:
(1) The act of "recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or across national borders[";]
(2) The means used include "by means of threat, or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person"[;]
(3) The purpose of trafficking includes "the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs[.]"61
(a) To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer, maintain, harbor, or receive a person by any means, including those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, or sexual exploitation.62
This Court in People v. Rodriguez acknowledged that as with Casio, the corroborating testimonies of the arresting officer and the minor victims were sufficient to sustain a conviction under the law.
In People v. Spouses Ybañez, et al., this Court likewise affirmed the conviction of traffickers arrested based on a surveillance report on the prostitution of minors within the area.
In People v. XXX and YYY, this Court held that the exploitation of minors, through either prostitution or pornography, is explicitly prohibited under the law. Casio also recognizes that the crime is considered consummated even if no sexual intercourse had taken place since the mere transaction consummates the crime.65 (Citations omitted)
ATTY. ISIDRO: (to witness) Q: When Mitchelle and Joane approached you, what did they tell you? A: Ate Joane asked me,"do you want to?" (gusto mo bang sumama?"). Q: Where will you go? A: She said we will go to Jollibee. And then we look for our two friends and there were also with us. Because we were many and they need many girls. .... Q: CCC, aside from eating, what will you be doing in Jollibee? A: We will have a party, party, and afterwards, she said that she will give us one thousand pesos. And then she will ask from us three hundred pesos. .... Q: CCC, what did they tell you, what will the foreigner do to you? A: That he will touch us (gagalawin daw kame). Q: CCC, what do you mean by "gagalawin"? A: One at a time (isa-isa). There will be one foreigner for all of us. Q: What do you mean, can you clarify? A: The foreigner will touch (gagalawin) each of us. Q: Can you clarify what will the foreigner do to you when you mentioned "gagalawin"? A: He will undress us. The same thing happened to me before. Q: Before we go to that CCC what happened to you before in the past, can you clarify what will the foreigner do to you after you were undressed? A: He will touch us including our breast. Q: So aside from those things that you mentioned do you expect other things to be done to you aside from the things that you mentioned? A: There is. Q: Can you explain to the c[o]urt what that other things you were referring to? A: That he will insert his penis into our vagina.66 (Citation omitted)
SECTION 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
SECTION 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. — A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.
(1) the person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he [or she] has just committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and (2) such overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.67 (Citation omitted)
There is entrapment when law officers employ ruses and schemes to ensure the apprehension of the criminal while in the actual commission of the crime. There is instigation when the accused is induced to commit the crime. The difference in the nature of the two lies in the origin of the criminal intent. In entrapment, the mens rea originates from the mind of the criminal. The idea and the resolve to commit the crime comes from him. In instigation, the law officer conceives the commission of the crime and suggests to the accused who adopts the idea and carries it into execution.69
In People v. Padua, this court underscored the value of flexibility in police operations:A prior surveillance is not a prerequisite for the validity of an entrapment or buy-bust operation, the conduct of which has no rigid or textbook method. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. However the police carry out its entrapment operations, for as long as the rights of the accused have not been violated in the process, the courts will not pass on the wisdom thereof. The police officers may decide that time is of the essence and dispense with the need for prior surveillance.
This flexibility is even more important in cases involving trafficking of persons. The urgency of rescuing the victims may at times require immediate but deliberate action on the part of the law enforcers.70 (Citations omitted)
Q: You mentioned that you were the driver of that van, am I correct? A: Yes, sir. Q: And who were you with inside the van? A: I was with the foreigner confidential asset, sir. .... Q: So once you reached the terminal, what happened next, if any? A: After no less than two minutes, sir, the first pimp later on identified as Michelle Valencia arrived bringing along with her the minor girls, sir, which she then offered for sexual services in the amount of P1,500.00. Q: How did you know that she was offering P1,500.00 each? A: I was then with the foreigner asset when she was dealing with the foreigner asset when she was dealing [with] the girls. Q: How far were you from them? A: More or less half meter, sir. Q: After the deal or the transaction, what happened next, if any? A: Before another female pimp arrived later on identified as Joan Simbillo, and then she was also bringing with her five girls which she also offered for sex services in the amount of P1,500.00 each. Q: How were you able to determine that Joan Simbillo was offering the girls for P1,500.00? A: Because I am also beside the foreigner asset when she was dealing, sir. Q: Same distance[?] A: Yes, sir.71 (Emphasis supplied)
SECTION 11. Date of commission of the offense. — It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was committed except when it is a material ingredient of the offense. The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission.
[U]nlike the other victims, AAA – the victim in Criminal Case No. 14-11900 – already performed sexual favors at the behest of accused-appellants in two (2) other incidents prior to the entrapment operation, the earliest of which, according to AAA's testimony in open court, was in February 2014. Clearly, the discrepancy in the date resulted from the fact that with regard to this particular victim, the prosecution took into consideration the continuing nature of the abuse. As such, contrary to accused-appellants' contentions, the Information in Criminal Case No. 14-11900 is not totally irrelevant from that which resulted in their warrantless arrests, and as such, accused-appellant Simbillo's conviction therefor was correct.74
The invalidity of an arrest leads to several consequences among which are: (a) the failure to acquire jurisdiction over the person of an accused: (b) criminal liability of law enforcers for illegal arrest: and (c) any search incident to the arrest becomes invalid thus rendering the evidence acquired as constitutionally inadmissible.
Lack of jurisdiction over the person of an accused as a result of an invalid arrest must be raised through a motion to quash before an accused enters his or her plea. Otherwise, the objection is deemed waived and an accused is estopped from questioning the legality of his [or her] arrest.
The voluntary submission of an accused to the jurisdiction of the court and his or her active participation during trial cures any defect or irregularity that may have attended an arrest. The reason for this rule is that the legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the accused.75 (Citations omitted)
Endnotes:
1Rollo, pp. 18-20.
2 Id. at 2-17. The May 17, 2017 Decision was penned by Associate Justice Manuel M. Barrios, and concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon M. Bato, Jr. and Renato C. Francisco of the Eleventh Division, Court of Appeals, Manila.
3 CA rollo, pp. 64-107. The June 4, 2015 Decision was penned by Presiding Judge Ma. Angelica T. Paras-Quiambao of Branch 59, Regional Trial Court, Angeles City.
4 Id. at 65.
5 CA Rollo, p 65 and Rollo, p. 3.
6 CA rollo, pp. 63-66 and rollo, p. 4. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11901.
7 Id. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11902.
8 CA rollo pp. 65-66 and rollo, p. 5. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11903.
9 CA rollo, pp. 66-67 and rollo, p. 5. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11904.
10 CA rollo, p. 67 and rollo, p. 6. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11905.
11 Id. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11906.
12 CA rollo, p. 67 and rollo, p. 7. This was docketed as Criminal Case No. 14-11907.
13 CA rollo, pp. 65-67.
14 Id. at 68-69.
15 Id. at 69.
16 Id. at 76-78.
17 Id. at 77-78.
18 Id. at 77.
19 Id. at 75.
20 Id. at 71-72.
21 Id. at 73.
22 Id. at 71-72.
23 Id. at 72.
24 Id. at 73.
25 Id. at 76.
26 Id. at 74.
27 Id.
28 Id. at 69.
29 Id. at 81-84.
30 Id. at 64-107.
31 Id. at 95-97.
32 Id. at 97-99.
33 Id. at 102-103.
34 Id. at 93.
35 Id. at 94-95.
36 Id. at 100.
37 Id. at 100-101.
38 Id. at 101-102.
39 Id. at 101.
40 Id. at 94-95 and 101-102.
41 Id. at 105-107.
42Rollo, pp. 2-17.
43 Id. at 13.
44 Id. at 16.
45 Id. at 18-20
46 Id at 21
47 Id. at 25.
48 Id at 28-33.
49 Id. at 34-38.
50 Id at 39-40
51 CA rollo, pp. 54-57.
52 Id. at 58-59.
53 Id. at 59.
54Ditche v. Court of Appeals, 384 Phil. 35, 46 (2000) [Per J. De Leon, Jr., Second Division].
55People v. Montinola, 567 Phil. 387, 404 (2008) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division] citing People v. Fernandez, 561 Phil. 287 (2007) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division]; People v. Abulon, 557 Phil 428 (2007) [Per J. Tinga, En Banc], and People v. Bejic, 552 Phil. 555 (2007) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, En Banc].
56People v. Baraoil, 690 Phil. 368, 377 (2012) [Per J. Reyes, Second Division].
57People v. Montinola, 567 Phil. 387, 404 (2008) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division] citing People v. Fernandez, 561 Phil. 287 (2007) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division]; People v. Abulon, 557 Phil. 428 (2007) [Per J. Tinga, En Banc]; and People v. Bejic, 552 Phil. 555 (2007) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, En Banc].
58 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
59 Id. at 472-473 citing Republic Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 3(a).
60 Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012.
61People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 474 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
62 Republic Act No. 10364 (2013). sec. 4(a).
63 Republic Act No. 9208 (2003), sec. 6(a).
64 G.R. No. 217978, January 30, 2019. < http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/65006 > [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
65 Id.
66 CA rollo, pp. 96-97.
67People v. Cogaed, 740 Phil. 212, 238 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
68 528 Phil. 740 (2006) [Per J. Carpio Morales, Third Division].
69 Id. at 751 citing Araneta v. Court of Appeals, 226 Phil. 437, 444 (1986) [Per J. Gutierrez, Jr., Second Division]. See also People v. Quiaoit, Jr., 555 Phil. 441, 449 (2007) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, Third Division]; People v. Cortez, 611 Phil. 360 (2009) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., Third Division]; People v. Tapere, 704 Phil. 359 (2013) [Per J. Bersamin, First Division].
70People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 482 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
71 CA rollo, pp. 145-146.
72 CA rollo, p. 65 and rollo, p. 3.
73People v. Rodriquez, 818 Phil. 625 (2017) [Per J. Martires, Third Division].
74Rollo, p. 15.
75Veridiano v. People, 810 Phil. 642, 653-654 (2017) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].
76 Criminal Case Nos. 14-11902 and 14-11903.
77 Criminal Case No. 14-11902.
78 Republic Act No. 10364 (2013). sec. 12 provides:
SECTION 12. Section 10 of Republic Act No. 9208 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"SECTION 10. Penalties and Sanctions. — The following penalties and sanctions are hereby established for the offenses enumerated in this Act:
....
(e)Any person found guilty of qualified trafficking under Section 6 shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of not less than Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00)[.]
79 Criminal Case no. 14-11900 as regards Simbillo and Criminal Case no. 14-11907 as regards Valencia.
80 Republic Act No. 10364 (2013), sec. 12 provides:
SECTION 12. Section 10 of Republic Act No. 9208 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"SECTION 10. Penalties and Sanctions. — The following penalties and sanctions are hereby established for the offenses enumerated in this Act:
(a) Any person found guilty of committing any of the acts enumerated in Section 4 shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of twenty (20) years and a tine of not less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (P2,000.000.00)[.]
81People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
82See Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].cralawredlibrary