63 People V Mallari
63 People V Mallari
63 People V Mallari
W/N the appellant is placed under a double jeopardy committing the crimes of estafa
NO. The singularity of the offense committed by petitioner is further demonstrated by the fact that the
falsification of the two (2) public documents as a means of committing estafa were performed on the
same date, in the same place, at the same time and on the same occasion.
It has also been ruled that when two informations refer to the same transaction, the second charge
cannot prosper because the accused will thereby be placed in jeopardy for the second time for the
same offense. 11
Petitioner, having already been convicted of the complex crime of estafa thru falsification of public
document in CA-G.R. No. 20817-CR, it stands to reason that she can no longer be held liable for the
same crime in this case. The rule against double jeopardy protects the accused not against the peril
of second punishment but against being tried for the same offense.