Practice question
The accused argues that reimbursement to the originally named customer necessarily voids the charge and extinguishes the alleged estafa. What is the sound Ricarze-based response?
- A reimbursing bank becomes the sole criminal offender.
- Reimbursement and subrogation do not by themselves erase the identified alleged criminal transaction.
- Every reimbursement conclusively proves no crime ever occurred.
- The accused may select a new offended party without court action.
- The criminal charge automatically converts into a bank-license case.
Legal references
- Rules of Court, Rule 110, Sections 7-15; Rule 116, Section 9; Rule 117, Sections 3(f) and 9; Rule 120, Section 3, as relevant: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html
- Ricarze v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 160451, February 9, 2007, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/feb2007/gr_160451_2007.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.