6/7/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
810 Phil. 187
THIRD DIVISION
[ G.R. No. 209859, June 05, 2017 ]
EILEEN P. DAVID, PETITIONER, VS. GLENDA S. MARQUEZ,
RESPONDENT.
DECISION
TIJAM, J.:
This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari[1] under Rule 45, assailing the Decision[2]
dated May 29, 2013 and Resolution[3] dated November 6, 2013 of the Court of Appears
(CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 124839, reinstating the criminal cases of Illegal Recruitment
and Estafa ag inst Petitioner Eileen David.
The Procedural and Factual Antecedents
In a Sinumpaang Salaysay filed before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Manila,
Respondent Glenda Marquez alleged, among others, that she is a resident of Sampaloc,
Manila and that sometime in March 2005, petitioner approached her in Kidapawan City
and represented that she could recruit her to work abroad.[4] It was further alleged
that petitioner demanded payment of placement fees and other expenses from the
respondent for the processing of the latter's application, to which the respondent
heeded.[5] Respondent's application was, however, denied and worse, the money that
she put out therefor was never returned.[6]
In her Counter-Affidavit and Counter Charge, petitioner averred that it was physically
impossible for her to have committed the said acts as she was in Canada at the alleged
time of recruitment as evidenced by the entries in her passport.[7] Petitioner further
averred that she was never engaged in the recruitment business.[8] The petitioner
alleged that the amount deposited in her account was not for her but was just coursed
through her to be given to her friend in Canada who was the one processing
respondent's application, as evidenced by a certification to that effect issued by the
said friend.[9] Further, petitioner argued before the Prosecutor that assuming arguendo
that the allegations of recruitment were true, the case should be filed in Kidapawan City
and not in Manila.[10]
On December 9, 2008, two separate Informations were filed against petitioner for
Illegal Recruitment and Estafa, respectively. The accusatory portions thereof read as
follows:
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63079
1/16