Flashcards Studio

A case is charged with Estafa through misappropriation. The information alleges that on 15 June 2026 at ABC Corp., the accused misappropriated PHP 3,000,000 entrusted to him by deceit. During trial, the prosecution seeks to admit: (a) an uncharged act of misappropriation by the same accused at another company within the same year, claimed to show pattern and intent; (b) a CCTV video from the corporation’s premises showing the accused handling cash, offered for identification, but no proper foundation or chain-of-custody testimony has been laid; (c) a prior arrest record for an unrelated offense to suggest propensity. The defense objects to (a) and (c) as outside the charged offense and prejudicial; The court sustains the objections to (a) and (c) but overrules the objection to (b) and admits the CCTV video for identification. The defense moves for acquittal or for dismissal on the ground that the prosecution is exceeding the charge (variance). (1) Identify the controlling doctrine governing the court’s rulings on prosecutorial conduct in this scenario. (2) Distinguish this doctrine from the concepts of (a) variance between information and evidence and (b) the procedure to amend the information. (3) Apply the doctrine to the facts: which rulings are correct or incorrect, and what is the proper remedy for the defense given the information as charged?