Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
As held by the RTC, apart from owning the trucks, no other link SO ORDERED.
has been established by the prosecution to hold respondent as a
conspirator in the hauling of the scrap materials. Even in the
instant petition,55 petitioner harps only on Ang being engaged in
scrap trading, owning the trucks, and employing the accused as
his truck drivers. Without more, none of these depicts any overt
act of respondent connected to the accomplishment of estafa.
All told, we are not inclined to disturb the conclusions of the RTC,
as these are based on the evidence on record. Neither are we in
disagreement with the CA, which remarked that the dismissal of
the criminal action against Ang is "not fatal to the cause of the
G.R. No. 200942 June 16, 2015 He shall serve his penalty in the National Penitentiary of Davao Our Ruling
Penal [C]olony.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, We totally agree with the RTC and the CA in finding that the guilt
vs. SO ORDERED.3 of appellant for the crime of murder was proved beyond
JORIE WAHIMAN y RAYOS, Accused-Appellant. reasonable doubt. There is no doubt that on April 2, 2003, at
Ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA) around 10 o’clock in the evening, appellant shot Buensuceso while
RESOLUTION the latter was about to enter the gate of the staff house of
In his appeal, appellant argued that when his supposed
Stanfilco-Dole in Malaybalay City, Bukidnon. Moreover, we agree
DEL CASTILLO, J.: extrajudicial confession was being taken, Atty. Michael Florentino
with the findings of the RTC and the CA that appellant’s
Dumlao (Atty. Dumlao), the lawyer who supposedly assisted him,
Appellant Jorie Wahiman y Rayos (appellant) was charged with extrajudicial confession6 was voluntarily and duly executed and
was not around. He arrived only when appellant was about to sign
the crime of murder for the death of Jose Buensuceso replete with details that only appellant could supply, viz.:
the extrajudicial confession.
(Buensuceso). During his arraignment, appellant pleaded not
x x x But before proceeding in questioning you, I am informing you
guilty.1 Trial on the merits ensued. Appellant also insisted that Azucena, the prosecution’s alleged
that under our new constitution, you have the right to the
eyewitness, did not actually see him shooting the victim.
The prosecution established that on April 2, 2003, at around 10 following:
o'clock in the evening, Buensuceso, the manager of Stanfilco-Dole, Appellant’s contentions were, however, disregarded by the CA.
A. You have the right to remain silent and not answer x x x my
Phils. in Malaybalay City, was on his way back to the company
In its Decision4 dated October 13, 2011, the CA found no reason to questions; it might be that I might use your answers as evidence
staff house on board his Isuzu pick-up after attending a despedida
depart from the trial court’s findings. It held that appellant’s against you or favorable to you.
for one of his employees.
contention that he lacked legal intervention and assistance during
01. QUESTION: Do you understand your right?
While he was about to enter the gate of the staff house, he was the taking of his extrajudicial confession was totally belied by the
gunned down by persons riding in tandem on a black motorcycle. testimony of Atty. Dumlao that he rendered assistance to the ANSWER: Yes[,] Sir.
The guard on duty, David Azucena (Azucena), who was then appellant throughout the entire proceedings and carefully
opening the gate, identified one of the assailants as herein explained to the latter the consequences of his admission. 02. QUESTION: Are you going to use your right?
appellant. Besides, the voluntariness of the execution of the extrajudicial
confession was apparent considering that it is replete with details ANSWER: I would rather not[,] sir[,] because I would tell the truth
During trial, the prosecution submitted in evidence the that only appellant would know. The appellate court brushed as to what had happened.
extrajudicial confession of appellant taken during the preliminary aside appellant’s assertion of torture, the same being
investigation of the case, admitting to the killing of Buensuceso. B. You have the right to avail [of] the services of a counsel of your
unsupported by medical certificate or marks of physical abuse. In
However, when it was appellant’s turn to testify, he narrated that choice to help you in this investigation, and if you can’t afford to
any case, he never bothered to narrate how he was tortured or to
at the time of the killing, he was at Landing Casisang, Malaybalay hire the services of a lawyer, the government will provide you
identify his alleged tormentors. Moreover, the ballistic
City attending the birthday celebration of his brother-in-law. with free legal services of a lawyer from the Integrated Bar of the
examination proved that the slugs used in killing Buensuceso were
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Philippines (IBP).
fired from the firearm earlier confiscated from appellant. The CA
also found no merit in appellant’s claim that Azucena did not 03. QUESTION: Do you understand your right?
On February 16, 2009, the RTC rendered its Decision2 finding
actually see him shoot the victim. The CA opined that although
appellant guilty as charged, viz.:
Azucena did not see appellant actually shoot the victim, he ANSWER: Yes[,] sir.
WHEREFORE, Judgment is issued finding the accused Jorie nonetheless saw appellant within seconds from hearing the
gunshots fleeing from the immediate vicinity of the crime scene 04: QUESTION: Are you going to use your right?
Wahiman y Rayos guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
murder and imposes upon him the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua aboard a motorcycle with a gun in hand. Based on the foregoing,
ANSWER: I have my own lawyer, he is Atty. Michael Florentino
and directing him to pay the heirs of the victim the sum of the appellate court found appellant’s denial and alibi undeserving
Dumlao III, we already had a talk and he made me understand x x
₱75,000.00 as moral damages, ₱75,000.00 [as] civil indemnity and of credence.
x my rights, and he also made me understand about this
actual damages as follows: investigation where I will voluntarily narrate what I x x x [know].
The dispositive portion of the CA’s Decision reads:
₱59,280,000.00 lost earning capacity of the deceased; 05. QUESTION: Did anybody give you money or promised to give
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the February 16, [2009]
decision rendered by Branch [8], Regional Trial Court, 9th Judicial you a reward, or did anybody intimidate you in giving this
[P]25,000.00 actual damages; no receipt was presented for
Region, Malaybalay City, is hereby AFFIRMED in toto. affidavit?
₱220,000[;]
SO ORDERED.5 ANSWER: Nobody[,] sir.
₱1,500.00 Appearance fee; and
Hence, this appeal. 06. QUESTION: Did you understand your rights that I told you?
₱50,000.00 Attorney’s fee.
ANSWER: Yes[,] sir.7
Appellant then proceeded to narrate that he was hired by Alex wage worker earning less than the minimum wage under current
Laranjo (Laranjo) and Kid Canadilla (Canadilla), for and in behalf of labor laws.10 Notably, this case does not fall under any of the
a certain Alonzo who owns a quarry in San Isidro, Valencia, to kill exceptions. The deceased victim could not be considered as a self-
the victim for a fee. According to appellant, Alonzo wanted the employed earning less than the minimum wage; neither could he
victim killed because the latter withheld the release of his be considered employed as a daily wage worker. However, we are
collectibles from Stanfilco-Dole. Appellant then narrated how he inclined to award lost earnings considering that the deceased, as
met with Laranjo, Canadilla and Alonzo; how he received testified by his widow, was the manager of Stanfilco-Dole, Phils. in
payments and instructions; how he planned the killing; and how Malaybalay City and was receiving a monthly salary of ₱95,000.00.
he executed the plan. Appellant signed his extrajudicial He was 54 years of age when gunned down by appellant. This
confession, with the assistance of Atty. Dumlao, and subscribed testimony was not objected to by appellant or questioned during
the same before Atty. Dennis B. Caayupan at the Office of the cross-examination or on appeal. Clearly, the existence of factual
Clerk of Court.8 basis of the award has been satisfactorily established. However,
the amount of the award for lost earnings must be modified
Moreover, Atty. Dumlao testified that he ably provided legal following the formula [2/3 x 80 – age] x [gross annual income -
assistance to appellant all throughout the proceedings and necessary expenses equivalent to 50% of the gross annual
carefully explained to him the ramifications of his admission. He income]. Thus: [2/3 x (80-54)] [(₱95,000 x 12) – 50% (₱95,000 x
informed appellant of his rights and that anything he says may be 12)] = ₱9,878,100.00.
used in evidence against him. Notwithstanding, appellant insisted
on giving his extrajudicial confession.9 In addition, the awards of actual damages in the amount of
₱25,000.00 must be deleted for lack of proof; in lieu thereof,
In any event, it must be stressed that appellant’s conviction was temperate damages in the amount of ₱25,000.00 is awarded. The
not based solely on his extrajudicial confession. The prosecution awards of civil indemnity in the amount of ₱75,000.00, and moral
likewise presented the eyewitness account of Azucena who damages in the amount of ₱75,000.00, are in line with prevailing
testified that immediately after hearing gunshots, he saw jurisprudence. In addition, the heirs of the victim are entitled to
appellant about 5 meters away from the Isuzu pick-up of the exemplary damages in the amount of ₱30,000.00. Finally, all
victim. Appellant was riding in tandem aboard a black motorcycle damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum
and was holding a gun. The ballistic report also confirmed that the from date of finality of this resolution until full payment.
slugs found at the crime scene were fired from the firearm earlier WHEREFORE, the assailed October 13, 2011 Decision of the Court
confiscated from the appellant. Moreover, appellant was not able of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR H.C. No. 00830-MIN finding appellant
to establish that it was physically impossible for him to be present Jorie Wahiman y Rayos guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
at the crime scene at the time of its commission. crime of murder is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS in that
appellant is not eligible for parole; the award for lost earnings is
The RTC and the CA thus properly found appellant guilty of
reduced to ₱9,878,100.00; the award of actual damages is
murder and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion
deleted; in lieu thereof, appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of
perpetua. However, it must be stated that appellant is not eligible
the victim ₱25,000.00 as temperate damages; he is likewise
for parole pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9346 or the
ordered to pay the heirs of the victim exemplary damages in the
Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines.
amount of ₱30,000.00; and all damages awarded shall earn
Anent the damages awarded, we find that modification is in interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this
order.1âwphi1 resolution until full payment.
Regarding the award for lost earnings, the general rule is that SO ORDERED.
there must be documentary proof to support indemnity for loss of
earning capacity. Admittedly, there are exceptions to this rule,
viz.:
Verily, the result of SEC Case No. 03-99-6259 will determine the
innocence or guilt of respondents in the criminal case for estafa.
SO ORDERED.cralawlawlibrary
G.R. No. 172505 October 1, 2014 The undersigned Assistant Prosecutor accuses Antonio M. Garcia 5. This notice of appeal is without prejudice to the filing of an
of the felony of Estafa as defined and penalized under Art. 318 of appropriate petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
ANTONIO M. GARCIA, Petitioner, the Revised Penal Code as amended, committed as follows: Court on the criminal aspect, upon the giving of due course
vs. thereto, private complainant shall endeavor to seek the
FERRO CHEMICALS, INC., Respondent. THAT on or about 15 July 1988, in Makati, Metro Manila, consolidation of this appeal with the said petition.19
Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
DECISION the above-named accused, with evident bad faith and deceit, did, On October 15, 1997, the Makati City Prosecutor’s Office and
then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, misrepresent Ferro Chemicals, Inc. also filed a petition for certiorari20 with this
LEONEN, J.:
to FERRO CHEMICALS, INC. (FCI) represented by Ramon M. Garcia, court, assailing the Regional Trial Court’s December 12, 1996
Before this court is a petition for review on certiorari1 assailing the that his share of stock/proprietary share with Ayala Alabang decision and July 29, 1997 order acquitting Antonio Garcia.21
decision2 of the Court of Appeals dated August 11, 2005 and its· Country Club, Inc. and Manila Polo Club, Inc. collectively valued at
about ₱10.00 Million Pesos, being part of other shares of stock The petition for certiorari22 filed before this court sought to annul
resolution3 dated April 27, 2006, denying petitioner Antonio
subject matter of a Deed of Absolute Sale and Purchase of Shares the decision of the trial court acquitting Antonio Garcia. People of
Garcia's motion for reconsideration.
of Stock between the accused and FCI, were free from all liens, the Philippines and Ferro Chemicals, Inc. argued that the trial
Antonio Garcia, as seller, and Ferro Chemicals, Inc., through encumbrances and claims by third persons, when in truth and in court "acted in grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
Ramon Garcia, as buyer, entered into a deed of absolute· sale and fact, accused well knew that aforesaid share of stock/proprietary excess of jurisdiction when it rendered the judgment of acquittal
purchase of shares of stock on July 15, 1988. The deed was for the share had already been garnished in July 1985 and subsequently based on affidavits not at all introduced in evidence by either of
sale and purchase of shares of stock from various corporations, sold at public auction in September 1989, and which the parties thereby depriving the people of their substantive right
including one class "A" share in Alabang Country Club, Inc. and misrepresentation and assurance FCI relied upon and paid the to due process of law."23 The verification/certification against
one proprietary membership in the Manila Polo Club, Inc.4 These consideration in accordance with the stipulated condition/manner forum shopping, signed by Ramon Garcia as president of Ferro
shares of stock were in the name of Antonio Garcia.5 The contract of payment, all to the damage and prejudice of FCI in the Chemicals, Inc., disclosed that the notice of appeal was filed "with
was allegedly entered into to prevent these shares of stock from aforestated amount of ₱10.00 Million Pesos. respect to the civil aspect of the case."24
being sold at public auction to pay the outstanding obligations of
Contrary to law.13 In the resolution25 dated November 16, 1998, this court dismissed
Antonio Garcia.6
the petition for certiorari filed, and entry of judgment was made
On March 3, 1989, a deed of right of repurchase over the same In the decision dated December 12, 1996 of the Regional Trial on December 24, 1998.26
shares of stock subject of the deed of absolute sale and purchase Court, Antonio Garcia was acquitted for insufficiency of
evidence.14 The Regional Trial Court held: On the other hand, the Court of Appeals,27 in its decision28 dated
of shares of stock was entered into between Antonio Garcia and
August 11, 2005, granted the appeal and awarded Ferro
Ferro Chemicals, Inc. Under the deed of right of repurchase,
From the foregoing, it is very clear that private complainant was Chemicals, Inc. the amount of ₱1,000,000.00 as actual loss with
Antonio Garcia can redeem the properties sold within 180 days
aware of the status of the subject CLUB SHARES. Thus, the legal interest and attorney’s fees in the amount of
from the signing of the agreement.7
element of false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means ₱20,000.00.29 The appellate court found that Antonio Garcia failed
Before the end of the 180-day period, Antonio Garcia exercised which constitute the very cause or the only motive which induced to disclose the Philippine Investment and Savings Organization’s
his right to repurchase the properties.8 However, Ferro Chemicals, the private complainant to enter into the questioned deed of sale lien over the club shares.30 Thus:
Inc. did not agree to the repurchase ofthe shares of stock.9 Thus, (Exh. "A") is wanting in the case at bar.15 (Underscoring in the
original) The issue in this case is whether or not Antonio Garcia disclosed
Antonio Garcia filed an action for specific performance and
to Ferro-Chemicals, during the negotiation stage of the impending
annulment of transfer of shares.10
Ferro Chemicals, Inc. filed a motion for reconsideration, which sale of the imputed club shares, the third attachment lien in favor
On September 6, 1989, the class "A" share in Alabang Country was denied by the Regional Trial Court in the order dated July 29, of Philippine Investment and Savings Organization (PISO) which,
Club, Inc. and proprietary membership in the Manila Polo Club, 1997.16 ultimately, became the basis of the auction sale of said club
Inc., which were included in the contracts entered intobetween shares. We have scrutinized the records of the case but found no
On August 25, 1997, Ferro Chemicals, Inc. appealed to the Court evidence that Antonio Garcia intimated to his brother the third
Antonio Garcia and Ferro Chemicals, Inc., were sold at public
of Appeals the July 29, 1997 order of the Regional Trial Court as to attachment lien of PISO over the said club shares. While it is true
auction to Philippine Investment System Organization.11
the civil aspect of the case.17 The notice of appeal18 filed was that Antonio Garcia divulged the two liens of Security Bank and
On September 3, 1990, the information based on the complaint of entitled "Notice of Appeal Ex Gratia Abudantia Ad Cautelam (Of Insular Bank of Asia and America, the lien of PISO was clearly not
Ferro Chemicals, Inc. was filed against Antonio Garcia before the The Civil Aspect of the Case)." It alleged: discussed. The affidavits executed by the two lawyers to the effect
Regional Trial Court.12 He was charged with estafaunder Article that the lien of PISO was considered but deliberately left out in
4. Herein private complainant hereby gives notice, out of extreme
318 (Other Deceits) of the Revised Penal Code for allegedly the deed cannot be given much weight as they were never placed
caution, that it is appealing the Decision dated 12 December 1996
misrepresenting to Ferro Chemicals, Inc. that the shares subject of on the witness stand and cross-examined by Ferro-Chemicals. If
and the Order dated 29 July 1997 on the civil aspect of the case to
the contracts entered into were free from all liens and their affidavits, although not offered, were considered inthe
the Court of Appeals on the ground that it is notin accordance
encumbrances. The information reads: criminal aspect and placed a cloud on the prosecution’s thrust,
with the law and the facts of the case.
theycannot be given the same probative value in this civil aspect
as only a preponderance of evidence is necessary to carry the day Dennis Villa Ignacio and Antonio Garcia where the admissibility of charged in the information determines the court that has
for the plaintiff, Ferro Chemicals. the affidavits was put in issue held that the trial court did not jurisdiction over the case.47
commit any grave abuse of discretion in the challenged
While Antonio Garcia insists that no consideration was ever made decision.37 He then reasoned that "pursuant to the law of the The information charged Antonio Garcia with violation of Article
over the club shares as the same were merely given for case, [the affidavits of Gonzalez and Navarro] are admissible and 318 of the Revised Penal Code, which is punishable by arresto
safekeeping, the document denominated as Deed of Absolute Sale should be given weight."38 mayor, or imprisonment for a period of one (1) month and one (1)
states otherwise. It is a basic rule of evidence that between day to six (6) months. Article 318 states:
documentary evidence and oral evidence, the former carries more Finally, Antonio Garcia claims thatboth he and and Ferro
weight. Chemicals, Inc. acted in bad faith when they entered into the deed ART. 318: Other deceits. – The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine
of absolute sale as a scheme to defraud Antonio Garcia’s of not less than the amount of the damage caused and not more
Also, We have observed that in Antonio Garcia’s letter of creditors. Thus, they are in pari delicto and Ferro Chemicals, Inc. than twice such amount shall be imposed upon any person who
redemption addressed to Ferro Chemicals, he mentioned his should not be allowed to recover from Antonio Garcia.39 shall defraud or damage another by any other deceit not
interest in redeeming the company shares only. That he did not mentioned in the preceding articles of this chapter.
include the club shares only meant that said club shares no longer In its comment,40 Ferro Chemicals, Inc. points out that Antonio
had any much redeemable value as there was a lienover them. To Garcia raised factual issues not proper ina Rule 45 petition and Any person who, for profit or gain, shall interpret dreams, make
redeem them would be pointless. reiterates the findings of the Court of Appeals.41 forecasts, tell fortunes, or take advantage of the credulity of the
public in any other similar manner, shall suffer the penalty of
If they had no redeemable value to Antonio Garcia, to Ferro There are pertinent and important issues that the parties failed to arresto mayoror a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
Chemical they were certainly marketable assets. The non- raise before the trial court, Court of Appeals, and this court.
disclosure of the third lien in favor of PISO materially affected Nonetheless, we resolve to rule on these issues. When the information was filed on September 3, 1990, the law in
Ferro Chemicals since it was not able to act on time to protect its force was Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 before it was amended by
interest when the auction sale over the club shares actually took As a general rule, this court through its appellate jurisdiction can Republic Act No. 7691. Under Section 32 of Batas Pambansa Blg.
place. As a result, Ferro Chemicals suffered losses due to the only decide on matters or issues raised by the parties.42 However, 129, the Metropolitan Trial Court had jurisdiction over the case:
unfortunate public auction sale. It is but just and fair that Antonio the rule admits of exceptions.43 When the unassigned error affects
jurisdiction over the subject matter44 or when the consideration of SEC. 32. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Garcia be made to compensate the loss pursuant to Articles 21
the error is necessary for a complete resolution of the case,45 this Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in criminal cases.–
and 2199 of the Civil Code.
court can still decide on these issues.
....
The actual loss suffered by Ferro Chemicals amounted to
₱1,000,000.00 which correspondents to the bid value of the club We cannot turn a blind eye on glaring misapplications of the law
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with
shares at the time of the auction as evidenced by the Sheriff’s or patently erroneous decisions or resolutions simply because the
imprisonment of not exceeding four years and two months, or a
Certificate of Sale.31 (Citations omitted) parties failed to raise these errors before the court. Otherwise, we
fine of not more than four thousand pesos, or both such fine and
will be allowing injustice by reason of the mistakes of the parties’
imprisonment, regardless of other imposable accessory or other
Antonio Garcia filed a motion for reconsideration and Ferro counsel and condoning reckless and negligent acts of lawyers to
penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or
Chemicals, Inc. filed a partial motion for reconsideration of the the prejudice of the litigants. Failure to rule on these issues
predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount
decision of the Court of Appeals.32 These motions were denied in amounts to an abdication of our duty to dispense justice to all
thereof: Provided, however, That in offenses involving damage to
the resolution33 dated April 27, 2006. Thus, Antonio Garcia filed parties.
property through criminal negligence they shall have exclusive
this petition for review on certiorari,34 assailing the decision and
The issues are: original jurisdiction where the imposable fine does not exceed
resolution of the Court of Appeals.
twenty thousand pesos. (Emphasis supplied)
Antonio Garcia argues that the factual findings of the Court of I. Whether the Regional Trial Court had jurisdiction over the case
The Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction to hear and
Appeals were erroneous35 and insists that "[Ferro Chemicals, Inc.]
II. Whether the act of FerroChemicals, Inc. in filing the notice of decide the case. This lack of jurisdiction resulted in voiding all of
was fully aware that the shares covered by the Deed of Absolute
appeal before the Court of Appeals and the petition for certiorari the trial court’s proceedings and the judgment
Sale, including the Subject Club Shares, were not free from liens
assailing the same trial court decision amounted to forum rendered.48 Although the trial court’s lack of jurisdiction was never
and encumbrances and that the Deed [of] Sale was executed [to]
shopping raised as an issue in any part of the proceedings and even until it
warehouse [Antonio Garcia’s] assets based on, among other
reached this court, we proceed with resolving the matter.
evidence, the affidavits executed by Jaime Gonzales . . . and III. Whether Ferro Chemicals, Inc. was entitled to the awards given
Rolando Navarro. . . ."36 as civil liability ex delicto In Pangilinan v. Court of Appeals,49 this court held:
Antonio Garcia faults the Court of Appeals in disregarding the The Regional Trial Court did not have jurisdiction Thus, we apply the general rule thatjurisdiction is vested by law
affidavits executed by Jaime Gonzales and Rolando Navarro. and cannot be conferred or waived by the parties. Even on appeal
Antonio Garcia argues that even thiscourt in G.R. No. 130880 Jurisdiction of a court over the subject matter is vested by and even if the reviewing parties did not raise the issue of
entitled People of the Philippines and Ferro Chemicals, Inc. v. Hon. law.46 In criminal cases, the imposable penalty of the crime
jurisdiction, the reviewing court is not precluded fromruling that The test for determining the existence of forum shopping is action, its proceedings are suspended until the final outcome of
the lower court had no jurisdiction over the case[.] whether the elements of litis pendentiaare present, or whether a the criminal action. The civil liability based on delict is
final judgment in one case amounts to res judicatain another. extinguished when the court hearing the criminal action declares
.... Thus, there is forum shopping when the following elements are that ‘the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did
present: (a) identity of parties, or at least such parties asrepresent not exist’."60 (Emphasis supplied, citations omitted).
Having arrived at the conclusion that the Regional Trial Court did
the same interests in both actions; (b) identity of rights asserted
not have jurisdiction to try the case against the appellant, it is no When the trial court’s decision was appealed as to its criminal
and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts;
longer necessary to consider the other issues raised as the aspect in the petition for certiorari before thiscourt, the civil
and (c) the identity of the two preceding particulars, such that any
decision of the Regional Trial Court is null and void.50 aspect thereof is deemed included in the appeal. Thus, the relief
judgment rendered in the other action will, regardless of which
party is successful, amount to res judicatain the action under prayed for by Ferro Chemicals, Inc., that is, recovery of civil
The trial court’s lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by the parties’
consideration; said requisites are also constitutive of the liability ex delicto, is asserted in both actions before this court and
silence on the matter.51 The failure of the parties to raise the
requisites for auter action pendant or lis pendens.56 (Citation the Court of Appeals.
matter of jurisdiction also cannot be construed as a waiver of the
parties. Jurisdiction is conferred by law and cannot be waived by omitted)
Even the allegations in the notice of appeal readily show that
the parties. Ferro Chemicals, Inc. committedforum shopping, to wit:
There is no question that Ferro Chemicals, Inc. committed forum
The assailed decision is void, considering that it originates from a shopping when it filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals and
5. This notice of appeal is without prejudice to the filing of an
void decision of the Regional Trial Court for lack of jurisdiction a petition for certiorari before this court assailing the same trial
appropriate petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
over the subject matter. court decision. This is true even if Ferro Chemicals, Inc.’s notice of
Court on the criminal aspect, upon the giving of due course
appeal to the Court of Appeals was entitled "Notice of Appeal Ex
thereto, private complainant shall endeavor to seek the
Ferro Chemicals, Inc. committed forum shopping Gratia Abudantia Ad Cautelam (Of The Civil Aspect of the
consolidation of this appeal with the said petition.61
Case)."57 The "civil aspect of the case" referred to by Ferro
Forum shopping is defined as "theact of a litigant who ‘repetitively Chemicals, Inc. is for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto. As to the third requisite, on the assumption that the trial court
availed of several judicial remedies in different courts, However, it failed to make a reservation before the trial court to had jurisdiction over the case, this court’s decision in G.R. No.
simultaneously or successively, all substantially founded on the institute the civil action for the recovery of civil liability ex 130880 affirming the trial court’s decision acquitting the accused
same transactions and the same essential facts and delictoor institute a separate civil action prior to the filing of the for lack of an essential element of the crime charged amounts to
circumstances, and all raising substantially the same issues either criminal case. res judicatato assert the recovery of civil liability arising from the
pending in, or already resolved adversely by some other court . . .
offense. This court’s resolution dismissing the petition for
to increase his chances of obtaining a favorable decision if not in There is identity of parties. Petitioner, Antonio Garcia, and
certiorari filed by Ferro Chemicals, Inc. states:
one court, then in another’."52 Once clearly established that forum respondent, Ferro Chemicals, Inc., are both parties in the appeal
shopping was committed willfully and deliberately by a party or filed before the Court of Appeals and the petition for certiorari In any event, petitioners failed to sufficiently show that any grave
his or her counsel, the case may be summarily dismissed with before this court. abuse of discretion was committed by the Regional Trial Court in
prejudice, and the act shall constitute direct contempt and a rendering the challenged decision and order which, on the
cause for administrative sanctions.53 There is identity of the rights asserted and reliefs prayed for in
contrary, appear to be in accord with the facts and the applicable
both actions. At a glance, it may appear that Ferro Chemicals, Inc.
law and jurisprudence.62
Forum shopping is prohibited, and sanctions are imposed on asserted different rights: The appeal before the Court of Appeals
those who commit forum shopping as "it trifles with the courts, is purely on the civil aspect of the trial court’s decision while the Litigants cannot avail themselves of two separate remedies for the
abuses their processes, degrades the administration of justice and petition for certiorari before this court is allegedly only onthe same relief in the hope that in one forum, the relief prayed for will
adds to the already congested court dockets."54 This court has criminal aspect of the case. However, the civil liability asserted by be granted. This is the evil sought tobe averted by the doctrine of
said: Ferro Chemicals, Inc. before the Court of Appeals arose from the non-forum shopping, and this is the problem that has happened in
criminal act. It is in the nature of civil liability ex delicto. Ferro this case. This court denied the petition for certiorari filed byFerro
What is critical is the vexation brought upon the courts and the Chemicals, Inc. did not reserve the right to institute the civil action Chemicals, Inc. resulting in finality of the trial court’s
litigants by a party who asks different courts to rule on the same for the recovery of civil liability ex delictoor institute a separate decision.1awp++i1 The decision found Antonio Garcia not guilty of
or related causes and grant the same or substantially the same civil action prior to the filing of the criminal case.58 Thus, it is an the offense charged, and no civil liability was awarded to Ferro
reliefs and in the process creates the possibility of conflicting adjunct of the criminalaspect of the case.1âwphi1 As held in Lim v. Chemicals, Inc. However, at present,there is a conflicting decision
decisions being rendered by the different fora upon the same Kou Co Ping:59 from the Court of Appeals awarding Ferro Chemicals, Inc. civil
issues, regardless of whether the court in which one of the suits
indemnity arising from the offense charged.
was brought has no jurisdiction over the action.55 (Citation The civil liability arising from the offense or ex delictois based on
omitted) the acts or omissions that constitute the criminal offense; hence, When the civil action for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto is
its trial is inherently intertwined with the criminal action.For this instituted with the criminal action, whether by choice of private
The test and requisites that must concur to establish when a reason, the civil liability ex delictois impliedly instituted with the complainant (i.e., no reservation is made or no prior filing of a
litigant commits forum shopping are the following: criminal offense. If the action for the civil liability ex delictois separate civil action) or as required by the law or rules, the case
instituted prior to or subsequent to the filing of the criminal
will be prosecuted under the direction and control of the public preponderance of evidence is required; (b) if the court declared 7610.1 The victim was her own Grade 1 pupil whom she physically
prosecutor.63 The civil action cannot proceed independently of the that the liability of the accused is only civil;and (c) if the civil maltreated for having accidentally bumped her knee while she
criminal case. This includes subsequent proceedings on the liability of the accused does not arise from or is not based upon was drowsing off on a bamboo sofa as he entered the classroom.
criminal action such as an appeal. In any case, Ferro Chemicals, the crime of which the accused is acquitted.68 Her maltreatment left him with physical injuries, as duly certified
Inc. joined the public prosecutor in filing the petition for certiorari by a physician.
before this court. Ramon Garcia, President of Ferro Chemicals, However, if the state pursues an appeal on the criminal aspect of
Inc., signed the verification and certification of non-forum a decision of the trial court acquitting the accused and private Whether or not the petitioner thereby committed child abuse is
shopping of the petition for certiorari.64 complainant/s failed to reserve the right to institute a separate the question that this appeal must determine, in light of the
civil action,the civil liability ex delictothat is inherently attached to Court's pronouncement in Bongalon v. People of the
We must clarify, however, that private complainants in criminal the offense is likewise appealed. The appeal of the civil liability ex Philippines2 that:
cases are not precluded from filing a motion for reconsideration delictois impliedly instituted with the petition for certiorari
and subsequently an appeal on the civil aspect of a decision assailing the acquittal of the accused. Private complainant cannot Not every instance of the laying of hands on a child constitutes
acquitting the accused. An exception to the rule that only the anymore pursue a separate appeal from that of the state without the crime of child abuse under Section 10 (a) of Republic Act No.
Solicitor General can bring actions in criminal proceedings before violating the doctrine of non-forum shopping. 7610. Only when the laying of hands is shown beyond reasonable
the Court of Appeals or this court is "when the private offended doubt to be intended by the accused to debase, degrade or
party questions the civil aspect of a decision of a lower On the other hand, the conclusion isdifferent if private demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human
court."65 As discussed in Mobilia Products, Inc. v. Hajime complainant reserved the right to institute the civil action for the being should it be punished as child abuse. Otherwise, it is
Umezawa:66 recovery of civil liability ex delicto before the Regional Trial Court punished under the Revised Penal Code.
orinstitute a separate civil action prior to the filing of the criminal
In a criminal case in which the offended party is the State, the case in accordance with Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. In these Antecedents
interest of the private complainant or the offended party is situations, the filing of an appealas to the civil aspect of the case
The State, through the Office ofthe Solicitor General, summed up
limited to the civil liability arising there from. Hence, if a criminal cannot be considered as forum shopping.1âwphi1 This is not the
the factual antecedents in its comment,3 as follows:
case is dismissed by the trial court or if there is an acquittal, a situation here.
reconsideration of the order of dismissal or acquittal may be On February 13, 1996, seven yearold Michael Ryan Gonzales, then
undertaken, whenever legally feasible, insofar as the criminal We see no more reason to discuss the issues presented by the
a Grade 1 pupil at Pughanan Elementary School located in the
aspect there of is concerned and may be made only by the public parties in light of the foregoing discussion.
Municipality of Lambunao, Iloilo, was hurriedly entering his
prosecutor; or in the case of an appeal, by the State only, through classroom when he accidentally bumped the knee of his teacher,
Entry of judgment having been made on the resolution of the
the OSG. The private complainant or offended party may not petitioner Felina Rosaldes, who was then asleep on a bamboo sofa
court in G.R. No. 130880 involving the same parties and issues and
undertake such motion for reconsideration or appeal on the (TSN, March 14, 1997, pp. 5-6). Roused from sleep, petitioner
by virtue of the doctrine of finality of judgment, we reiterate the
criminal aspect of the case.However, the offended party or private asked Michael Ryan to apologize to her. When Michael did not
resolution of this court.
complainant may file a motion for reconsideration of such obey but instead proceeded to his seat (TSN, March 14, 1997, p.
dismissal or acquittal or appeal therefrom but only insofar as the WHEREFORE, the resolution in G.R. No. 130880 is reiterated. We 6), petitioner went to Michael and pinched him on his thigh. Then,
civil aspect thereof is concerned. In so doing, the private grant the petition insofar as it prays for the setting aside of the she held him up by his armpits and pushed him to the floor. As he
complainant or offended party need not secure the conformity of Court of Appeals' decision d~ted August 11, 2005 and resolution fell, Michael Ryan’s body hit a desk. As a result, he lost
the public prosecutor. If the court denies his motion for dated April 27, 2006 as a final decision over the assailed Regional consciousness. Petitioner proceeded topick Michael Ryan up by
reconsideration, the private complainant or offended party may Trial Court decision that was rendered on November 16, 1998 in his ears and repeatedly slammed him down on the floor. Michael
appeal or file a petition for certiorarior mandamus,if grave abuse G.R. No. 130880. Ryan cried (TSN, March 14, 1997, p. 6; TSN, November 13, 1997,
amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction is shown and the p. 7).
aggrieved party has no right of appeal or given an adequate SO ORDERED.
remedy in the ordinary course of law.67 (Citations omitted) After the incident, petitioner proceeded to teach her class. During
G.R. No. 173988 October 8, 2014 lunch break, Michael Ryan, accompanied by two of his classmates,
This is in consonance with the doctrine that: Louella Loredo and Jonalyn Gonzales, went home crying and told
FELINA ROSALDES, Petitioner,
his mother about the incident (TSN, March 14, 1997, p. 7). His
[T]he extinction of the penal action does not necessarily carry vs.
mother and his Aunt Evangeline Gonzales reported the incident to
with it the extinction ofthe civil action, whether the latter is PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
their Barangay Captain, Gonzalo Larroza (TSN, February 1, 1999, p.
instituted with or separately from the criminal action. The
DECISION 4) who advised them to have Michael Ryan examined by a doctor.
offended party may still claim civil liability ex delictoif there is a
Michael Ryan’s aunt and Barangay Councilman Ernesto Ligante
finding in the final judgment in the criminal action that the act or
BERSAMIN, J.: brought him to the Dr. Ricardo Y. Ladrido Hospital where he was
omission from which the liability may arise exists. Jurisprudence
examined by Dr. Teresita Castigador. They, likewise, reported the
has enumerated three instances when, notwithstanding the The petitioner, a public schoolteacher, was charged with and incident to the Police Station (TSN, July 27, 1997, p. 6; TSN,
accused’s acquittal, the offended party may still claim civil liability found guilty of child abuse, a violation of Republic Act No. February 1, 1999, p. 4).
ex delicto: (a) if the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt as only
The medical certificate issued by Dr. Teresita Castigador reads, in considered, judgment is hereby rendered by us DISMISSING the which the Court may review findings of fact by the lower courts,
part: appeal filed in this case and AFFIRMING the decision rendered on to wit: (a) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on
June 26, 2003 by the court a quo in Criminal Case No. 46893 with speculation, surmise and conjecture; (b) the inference made is
1. Petechiae and tenderness of both external ears 1x2 cm. and 1x1 the MODIFICATION that the accusedappellant is sentenced to manifestly mistaken; (c) there is grave abuse of discretion; (d) the
cm.; suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years, two (2) months judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts; (e) the findings
and one (1) day of prision correccional, as the minimum of it, to of fact are conflicting; (f) the collegial appellate courts went
2. Lumbar pains and tenderness at area of L3-L4;
ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as the maximum beyond the issues of the case, and their findings are contrary to
3. Contusions at left inner thigh 1x1 and 1x1 cm.; thereof. the admissions of both appellant and appellee; (g) the findings of
fact of the collegial appellate courts are contrary to those of the
4. Tenderness and painful on walking especially at the area of IT IS SO ORDERED.8 trial court; (h) said findings of fact are conclusions without citation
femoral head. of specific evidence on which they are based; (i) the facts set forth
In her petition for review on certiorari,9 the petitioner submits
in the petition aswell as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs
The petitioner was criminally charged with child abusein the that:
are not disputed by the respondents; (j) the findings of fact of the
Regional Trial Court in Iloilo City (RTC), and the case was assigned collegial appellate courts are premised on the supposed evidence,
I
to Branch 27 of that court. The information alleged as follows: The but are contradicted by the evidence on record; and (k) all other
Provincial Prosecutor of Iloilo, upon approval and Directive of the The Court of Appeals erred in convicting the petitioner by holding similar and exceptional cases warranting a review of the lower
Deputy OMBUDSMAN for the Visayas accuses FELINA ROSALDES that the acts of the petitioner constitute child abuse penalized courts’ findings of fact. A further exception is recognized when the
of the crime of VIOLATION OF CHILD ABUSE LAW under Section 10 (a) of Republic Act No. 7610[,] and notunder the CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed
Revised Penal Code. bythe parties, which, if properly considered, would justify a
(Section 10 (a) of R.A. 7610), committed as follows:
different conclusion.12 Yet, none of the exceptions applies herein.
II
That on or about the 13th day of February 1996, in the
Secondly, the petitioner contends that she did not deliberately
Municipality of Lambunao, Province of Iloilo, Philippines and The Court of Appeals erred in convicting the petitioner by holding inflict the physical injuries suffered by MichaelRyan to maltreat or
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named that petitioner’s constitutional right to due process and her right malign him in a manner that would debase, demean or degrade
accused, being a public school teacher in Grade 1 of Pughanan to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against his dignity. She characterizes her maltreatment as anact of
Elementary School, with a Salary Grade below 26, under the DECS, her was not violated when the essential elements of the crime discipline that she as a school teacher could reasonably do
did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously maltreat charged were not properly recited in the information.10 towards the development of the child. She insists that her act
her pupil Michael Ryan Gonzales, a seven year old child, by
further came under the doctrine of in loco parentis.
pinching him on different parts of his body, and thereafter Countering, the State, through the OSG, insists that the issues the
slumping him to the ground, thereby causing Michael Ryan petitioner is raising are mainly factual and, therefore, not The contention of the petitioner is utterly bereft of merit.
Gonzales to lose his consciousness and has suffered injuries on reviewable under the mode of appeal chosen; that the affirmance
different parts of his body. of her conviction by the CA was in accord with the pertinent law Although the petitioner, as a school teacher, could duly discipline
and jurisprudence, and supported by the overwhelming evidence Michael Ryan as her pupil, her infliction of the physical injuries on
CONTRARY TO LAW.4 of the trial; and that the information charging her with child abuse him was unnecessary, violent and excessive. The boy even fainted
was sufficient in form and substance.11 from the violence suffered at her hands.13 She could not justifiably
On June 26, 2003, the RTC rendered judgment convicting the
claim that she acted only for the sake of disciplining him. Her
petitioner of child abuse,5 disposing as follows: Ruling of the Court physical maltreatment of him was precisely prohibited by no less
WHEREFORE, finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt than the Family Code, which has expressly banned the infliction of
The appeal lacks merit.
of Violation of Section 10 (a), Article VI of R.A. 7610, the Court corporal punishmentby a school administrator, teacher or
sentences her to an indeterminate prison term ranging from four First of all, the State correctly contends that the petitioner could individual engaged in child care exercising special parental
(4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day of prision correccional, raise only questions of law in her present recourse. Under Rule 45 authority (i.e., in loco parentis), viz:
as minimum, to six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as of the Rules of Court, the appeal is limited to questionsof law. The
Article 233. The person exercising substitute parental authority
maximum, and to pay the costs. immediate implication of the limitation is to have the findings of
shall have the same authority over the person of the child as the
fact by the CA, which affirmed the findings of fact by the trial
No pronouncement as to civil liability, the same not having been parents.
court, conclude the Court by virtue of its not being a trier of fact.
proved. As such, the Court cannot analyze or weigh the evidence all over In no case shall the school administrator, teacher or individual
again. engaged in child care exercising special parental authority inflict
SO ORDERED.6
corporal punishment upon the child. (n)
It is true that the limitation of the review to errors of law admits
On appeal, the CA affirmed the conviction of the petitioner
of exceptions. Under Section 4, Rule 3 of the Internal Rules of the Proof of the severe results of the petitioner’s physical
through its assailed decision promulgated on May 11, 2005,7 with
Supreme Court, the following situations are the exceptions in maltreatment of Michael Ryan was provided by Dr. Teresita
a modification of the penalty, viz: WHEREFORE, premises
Castigador, the Medico-Legal Officer of the Dr. Ricardo Y. Ladrido xxxx requirements of Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court.
Memorial Hospital in Iloilo who examined the victim at about 1:00 Moreover, the Court should no longer entertain the petitioner’s
o’clock in the afternoon of February 13, 1996, barely three hours In the crime charged against the petitioner, therefore, the challenge against the sufficiency of the information in form and
from the timethe boy had sustained his injuries. Her Medical maltreatment may consist of an act by deedsor by wordsthat substance. Her last chance to pose the challenge was prior to the
Report stated as follows: debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a time she pleaded to the information through a motion to quash
child as a human being. The act need not be habitual. The CA on the ground that the information did not conform substantially
1. Petechiae and tenderness of both external ears 1x2 cm. and 1x1 concluded that the petitioner "went overboard in disciplining to the prescribed form, or did not charge an offense. She did not
cm.; Michael Ryan, a helpless and weak 7-year old boy, when she do so, resulting in her waiver of the challenge.
pinched hard Michael Ryan on the left thigh and when she held
2. Lumbar pains and tenderness at area of L3-L4; him in the armpits and threw him on the floor[; and as] the boy Fourthly, the RTC did not grant civil damages as civil liability ex
fell down, his body hit the desk causing him to lose consciousness delictobecause no evidence had been adduced thereon.20 The CA
3. Contusions at left inner thigh 1x1 and 1x1 cm.;
[but instead] of feeling a sense of remorse, the accused-appellant saw nothing wrong with the omission by the trial court. The
4. Tenderness and painful on walking especially at the area of further held the boy up by his ears and pushed him down on the explanation tendered by the trial judge for the omission was
femoral head. floor."15 On her part, the trial judge said that the physical pain misplaced, however, because even without proof of the actual
experienced by the victim had been aggravated by an emotional expenses, or testimony on the victim’s feelings, the lower courts
Reflecting her impressions of the physical injuries based on the trauma that caused him to stop going to school altogether out of still had the authority to define and allow civil liability arising from
testimonial explanations of Dr. Castigador, the trial judge fear of the petitioner, compelling his parents to transfer him to the offense and the means to fix their extent. The child abuse
observed in the decision of June 26, 2003: another school where he had to adjust again.16 Such established surely inflicted on Michael Ryan physical and emotional trauma as
circumstances proved beyond reasonable doubt thatthe well as moral injury. It cannot also be denied that his parents
A petechiae (wound no. 1), according to Dr. Castigador is a petitioner was guilty of child abuse by deeds that degraded and necessarily spent for his treatment. We hold that both lower
discoloration of the skin caused by the extravasation of blood demeaned the intrinsic worth and dignity of Michael Ryan as a courts committed a plain error that demands correction by the
beneath it. She opined that the petechiae and tenderness of the human being. Court. Indeed, as the Court pointed out in Bacolod v. People,21 it
ears of the victim could have been caused by pinching. As to the was "imperative that the courts prescribe the proper penalties
lumbar pain and tenderness at the third and fourth level of the It was also shown that Michael Ryan’s physical maltreatment by when convicting the accused, and determine the civil liability to
vertebrae (wound no. 2), the doctor testified that during her the petitioner was neither her first or only maltreatment of a be imposed on the accused, unless there has been a reservation
examination of the victim the latter felt pain when she put child. Prosecution witness Louella Loredo revealed on cross of the action to recover civil liability or a waiver of its recovery,"
pressure on the said area. She stated that this could be caused by examination that she had also experienced the petitioner’s explaining the reason for doing so in the following manner:
pressure or contact with a hard object. Wound No. 3 is located on cruelty.17 The petitioner was also convicted by the RTC in Iloilo
the victim’sleft inner thigh. According to her this could not have City (Branch 39) in Criminal Case No. 348921 for maltreatment of It is not amiss to stress that both the RTC and the CA disregarded
been caused by ordinary pinching with pressure. Wound No. 4 is another childnamed Dariel Legayada.18 Such previous incidents their express mandate under Section 2, Rule 120 of the Rules of
located on the upper part of the left thigh. Dr. Castigador testified manifested that the petitioner had "a propensity for violence," as Courtto have the judgment, if it was of conviction, state: "(1) the
that she noticed that the boy was limping as he walked.14 the trial judge stated in her decision of June 26, 2003.19 legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts
committed by the accused and the aggravating or mitigating
Section 3 of RepublicAct No. 7610 defines child abusethusly: Thirdly, the petitioner submits that the information charging her circumstances which attended its commission; (2) the
with child abuse was insufficient in form and substance, in that participation ofthe accused in the offense, whether as principal,
xxxx the essential elements of the crime charged were not properly accomplice, or accessory after the fact; (3) the penalty imposed
alleged therein; and that her constitutional and statutory right to upon the accused; and (4) the civil liability or damages caused by
(b) "Child abuse" refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or
due process of law was consequently violated. his wrongful act or omission to be recovered from the accused by
not, of the child which includes any of the following:
the offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the
The petitioner’s submission deserves scant consideration.
(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or
abuse and emotional maltreatment; Under Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, the information is waived." Their disregard compels us to actas we now do lest the
sufficient if it states the name of the accused; the designation of Court be unreasonably seen as tolerant of their omission. That the
(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or Spouses Cogtas did not themselves seek the correction of the
the offense given by the statute; the acts or omissions complained
demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human omission by an appeal is no hindrance to this action because the
of as constituting the offense; the name of the offended party; the
being; Court, as the final reviewing tribunal, has not only the authority
proximate date of the commission of the offense; and the place
where the offense was committed. but also the duty to correct at any time a matter of law and
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such
justice.1âwphi1
as food and shelter; or
The information explicitly averred the offense of child
abusecharged against the petitioner in the context of the We also pointedly remind all trial and appellate courts to avoid
(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured
statutory definition of child abuse found in Section 3 (b) of omitting reliefs that the parties are properly entitled to by law or
child resulting in serious impairment of his growth and
Republic Act No. 7610, supra, and thus complied with the in equity under the established facts. Their judgments will not be
development or in his permanent incapacity or death.
worthy of the name unless they thereby fully determine the rights
and obligations of the litigants. It cannot be otherwise, for only by covered by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer the
a full determination of such rights and obligations would they penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.
betrue to the judicial office of administering justice and equity for
all. Courts should then be alert and cautious in their rendition of xxxx
judgments of conviction in criminal cases. They should prescribe
The CA revised the penalty fixed by the R TC by imposing the
the legal penalties, which is what the Constitution and the law
indeterminate penalty of four years, two months and one day of
require and expect them to do. Their prescription of the wrong
prision correccional, as minimum, to 10 years and one day of
penalties will be invalid and ineffectual for being done without
prision mayor, as the maximum, on the ground that the offense
jurisdiction or in manifest grave abuse of discretion amounting to
was aggravated by the petitioner being a public schoolteacher.23 It
lack of jurisdiction. They should also determine and set the civil
cited Section 3 l(e) of Republic Act No. 7610, which commands
liability ex delictoof the accused, in order to do justice to the
that the penalty provided in the Act "shall be imposed in its
complaining victims who are always entitled to them. The Rules of
maximum period if the offender is a public officer or employee."
Court mandates them to do so unless the enforcement of the civil
Her being a public schoolteacher was alleged in the information
liability by separate actions has been reserved or waived.22
and established by evidence as well as admitted by her. The
Moral damages should be awarded to assuage the moral and revised penalty was erroneous, however, because Section 10 (a)
emotional sufferings of the victim, and in that respect the Court of Republic Act No. 7610 punishes the crime committed by the
believes and holds that ₱20,000.00 is reasonable. The victim was petitioner with prision mayor in its minimum period, whose three
likewise entitled to exemplary damages, considering that Article periods are six years and one day to six years and eight months,
2230 of the Civil Code authorizes such damages if at least one for the minimum period; six years, eight months and one day to
aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the crime. seven years and four months, for the medium period; and seven
The child abuse committed by the petitioner was aggravated her years, four months and one day to eight years, for the maximum
being a public school teacher, a factor in raising the penalty to its period. The maximum of the indeterminate sentence should come
maximum period pursuantto Section 31(e) of Republic Act No. from the maximum period, therefore, and the Court fixes it at
7610. The amount of ₱20,000.00 as exemplary damages is seven years, four months and one day of prision mayor. The
imposed on in order to set an example for the public good and as minimum of the indeterminate sentence should come from
a deterrent to other public school teachers who violate the ban prision correccional in the maximum period, the penalty next
imposed by Article 233 of the Family Code, supra, against the lower than prision mayor in its minimum period, whose range is
infliction of corporal punishment on children under their from four years, two months and one day to six
substitute parental authority. The lack of proof of the actual years.1âwphi1 Accordingly, the minimum of the indeterminate
expenses for the victim’s treatmentshould not hinder the granting sentence is four years, nine months and 11 days, and the
of a measure of compensation in the formof temperate damages, maximum is seven years, four months and one day of prision
which, according to Article 2224 of the Civil Code, may be mayor.
recovered when some pecuniary loss has been suffered butits
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on
amount cannot be proved with certainty. There being no question
May 11, 2005, subject to the MODIFICATIONS that: (a) the
aboutthe injuries sustained requiring medical treatment,
petitioner shall suffer the indeterminate penalty of four (4) years,
temperate damages ofat least ₱20,000.00 are warranted, for it
nine (9) months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional, as
would be inequitable not to recognize the need for the treatment.
minimum, to seven (7) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of
Lastly, interest of 6% per annum shall be charged on all the items
pr is ion mayor, as the maximum; (b) the petitioner shall pay to
of civil liability, to be reckoned from the finality of this decision
Michael Ryan Gonzales ₱20,000.00 as moral damages, ₱20,000.00
until full payment.
as exemplary damages, and ₱20,000.00 as temperate damages,
The penalty for the child abusecommitted by the petitioner is that plus interest at the rate of 6% per annum on each item of the civil
prescribed in Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610, viz: liability reckoned from the finality of this decision until full
payment; and (c) the petitioner shall pay the costs of suit.
Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation
and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's Development. – SO ORDERED.
(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse,
cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for other conditions
prejudicial to the child's development including those covered by
Atiicle 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, but not
G.R. No. 196508 September 24, 2014 Leonardo filed an omnibus motion9 with the RTC seeking to Amelia’s determination to enforce her claim for damages in the
disqualify Atty. Atencia. He argued that Amelia could not be bigamy case.
LEONARDO A. VILLALON and ERLINDA TALDE- represented in the bigamy case because she was not a party to
VILLALON, Petitioners, the case, as she did not file the complaint-affidavit. He also argued The CA disposed of the certiorari petition under these terms:
vs. that Amelia had already waived her right to file a civil and criminal
AMELIA CHAN, Respondent. WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Resolution dated 3
case against him and his co-defendant Erlinda. Amelia opposed
March 2006 disqualifying Petitioner’s counsel to intervene and the
the omnibus motion,10 while the public prosecutor joined the
DECISION Order dated 5 September 2006 dismissing Criminal Case No. 05-
petitioners in disqualifyingAtty. Atencia from appearing in the
30485 is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. Public respondent is hereby
BRION, J.: case.11
inhibited from
We review in this petition for review on certiorari1 the July 30, In a resolution12 dated March 3, 2006, the RTC granted Leonardo’s
further hearing the case. This case is therefore REMANDED to the
2010 decision2 and April 8, 2011 resolution3 of the Court of omnibus motion. Trial of the case ensued thereafter.
Regional Trial Court of Antipolo City for RE-RAFFLE to another
Appeals (CA) in CAG.R. SP No. 93807. The CA annulled and set branch and for further proceedings. The trial court and public
On March 27, 2006, Amelia filed a petition13 for certiorari and
aside the March 3, 2006 resolution4 and September 5, 2006 prosecutor are ORDERED to allow the private prosecutor subject
prohibition, with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary
order5 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 74, Antipolo City, to the latter’s control and supervision to intervene in the
Restraining Order (TRO) and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction,
which disallowed the private offended party's counsel from proceedings in order to protect the interests of Petitioner as a
with the CA. In a resolution14 dated April 19, 2006, the CA issued a
participating in the prosecution of the petitioners for bigamy and complaining witness.
TRO enjoining further proceedings on the case.
dismissed the bigamy case filed against the petitioners,
respectively. Despite the TRO issued by the CA, trial of the bigamy case SO ORDERED.17
proceeded with the presentation of the prosecution’s evidence, to
Factual Antecedents Petition for review on certiorari with this Court
which Leonardo filed a demurrer to evidence. In an order15 dated
On May 6, 1954, the respondent Amelia Chan married Leon Basilio September 5, 2006, the RTC dismissed the bigamy case for failure With the denial of their motion for reconsideration18 before the
Chua in a civil ceremony solemnized by then Judge Cancio C. of the prosecution to prove the petitioners’ guilt. CA, the petitioners filed the present petition for review on
Garcia of the City Court of Caloocan. The respondent claimed that certiorari before this Court and raised the following arguments:
Petition for certiorari and prohibition with the CA
her husband Leon Basilio Chua and the present petitioner,
Leonardo A. Villalon, are one and the same person. A. The Decision of the Court of Appeals gravely transgresses the
In her petition for certiorari and prohibition before the CA, Amelia
petitioners’ constitutional right to due process of law, apart from
alleged grave abuse of discretion on the part of the RTC when it
During the subsistence of his marriage to Amelia, Leon Basilio being violative of the legal proscription against double jeopardy.
issued its March 3, 2006 resolution and proceeded with the
Chua, this time under the name of Leonardo A. Villalon, allegedly
bigamy case without permitting the participation of Atty. Atencia B. The Court of Appeals grossly erred in granting the petition for
contracted a second marriage with Erlinda Talde that took place
as private prosecutor. certiorari insofar as the Resolution, dated 3 March 2006, of
on June 2, 1993. This marriage was solemnized by Judge Ruth C.
Santos of the Municipal Trial Court of Antipolo, Rizal. therein respondent Judge was concerned.
In a decision16 dated July 30, 2010, the CA granted Amelia’s
petition and annulled the RTC’s March 3, 2006 resolution C. The petition in CA-G.R. SP No. 93907 is fatally defective in that,
Amelia, who was then living in the United States and could not
disqualifying Atty. Atencia from participation in the case, and its among other things, it failed toimplead the People of the
personally file a case for bigamy in the Philippines, requested
September 5, 2006 order that dismissed the bigamy case against Philippines as a party-respondent in that case, hence, the same
Benito Yao Chua and Wilson Go to commence the criminal
the petitioners. The CA ruled that the crime of bigamy, being should have been dismissed outright.19
proceedings against the petitioners. On September 13, 2003, a
public in nature, can be denounced by anyone, not only by the
verified complaint-affidavit6 alleging the commission of the crime
offended party, before the prosecuting authorities without the Our Ruling
of bigamy was filed with the Office of the City Prosecutor in
offended party losing her right to recover damages. Thus, the CA
Antipolo. Consequently, an Information7 was filed with the RTC, We find no merit in the petitioners’ arguments.
concluded that the trial court committed grave abuse of
docketed as Criminal Case No. 05-30485. On arraignment, the
discretion when it did not allow Atty. Atencia to intervene and
petitioners pleaded not guilty. First, the petitioners argue that the RTC’s September 5, 2006
represent Amelia in the bigamy case and that the trial court
order dismissing the bigamy case against themhad already
During the pre-trial (or on February 6, 2006), Atty. Apollo V. denied Amelia her right to due process.
become final because it was not assailed by the respondent in her
Atencia appeared in behalf of Amelia, the private offended party. petition for certiorari before the CA. The petitioners point out that
Also, the CA ruled that the offended party could be deprived of
On February 20, 2006, Atty. Atencia formally filed his entry of the respondent only particularly assailed the RTC’s March 3, 2006
the right to intervene in the criminal case only when he or she
appearance8 as private prosecutor, with the conformity and under resolution and failed to file a separate or amended petition for
expressly waives the civil action or reserves the right toinstitute
the control and supervision of Assistant City Prosecutor Gerardo certiorari to include the September 5, 2006 order as one of the
one. The CA found no such waiver from Amelia and held that Atty.
P. Barot. assailed orders of the RTC. Based on this assertion, the petitioners
Atencia’s appearance as private prosecutor was proof enough of
contend that the CA, in ordering the remand and re-raffle of the
bigamy case to another RTC branch, violates their right against respondent was never denied her right to participate in the
double jeopardy. proceedings and was even called to stand as a witness but the
respondent never appeared before the court because she was out
The petitioners are mistaken. The review by the CA on whether of the country during the whole proceedings on the bigamy case.
the RTC committed grave abuse of discretion encompassed, not
only the issuance of the March 3, 2006 resolution,but all Section 1621 of Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
proceedings in the bigamy case thereafter. This is apparent from Procedure22 expressly allows an offended party to intervene by
the words used by the respondent in her certiorari petition before counsel in the prosecution of the offense for the recovery of civil
the CA where she raised the following supporting grounds: liability where the civil action for the recovery of civil liability
arising from the offense charged is instituted with the criminal
1. THE RESPONDENT JUDGE ACTED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF action. The civil action shall be deemed instituted with the
DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION criminal action, except when the offended party waives the civil
IN ISSUING THE QUESTIONED RESOLUTION DATED 03 MARCH action, reserves the right to institute it separatelyor institutes the
2006 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 05-30485 WHICH HELD THAT NO civil action prior to the criminal action.23
CLAIM FOR CIVIL LIABILITY WAS DEEMED INSTITUTED IN THE
CRIMINAL CASE, AND CONSEQUENTLY DISQUALIFYING THE In this case, the CA found no suchwaiver from or reservation
OFFENDED PARTY’S COUNSEL FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE TRIAL made by the respondent.1âwphi1 The fact that the respondent,
OF THE CASE; who was already based abroad, had secured the services of an
attorney in the Philippines reveals her willingness and interest to
2. THE HEARINGS OF THE BIGAMY CASE WHEREIN THE participate in the prosecution of the bigamy case and to recover
PARTICIPATION OF THE PRIVATE PROSECUTOR IS EXPRESSLY civil liability from the petitioners. Thus, the RTC should have
PROHIBITED ARE WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION allowed, and should not have disqualified, Atty. Atencia from
AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION.20 (Emphasis intervening in the bigamy case as the respondent, being the
ours) Evidently, the CA’s review is not limited to the RTC’s March offended party, is afforded by law the right to participate through
3, 2006 resolution but also included the September 5, 2006 order counsel in the prosecution of the offense with respect to the civil
that was issued by the RTC in the course of the proceedings on the aspect of the case.
bigamy case. Thus, the RTC’s September 5, 2006 order, which
isstill the subject of review by this Court, has not attained finality Lastly, the petitioners argue that the respondent’s certiorari
and the CA’s assailed order of remanding and re-raffling the petition before the CA should have been dismissed outright
bigamy case to another trial court would not violate the because it failed to implead the "People of the Philippines" as a
petitioners’ right against double jeopardy. party-respondent.
Also, we emphasize that the RTC issued its September 5, 2006 The respondent’s failure to implead the "People of the
order in defiance of the TRO issued by the CA. The records show Philippines" as a party-respondent is not a fatal defect warranting
that the CA had issued a TRO on April 19, 2006, which should have the outright dismissal of her petition for certiorari and prohibition
prohibited the RTC from further proceeding on the case. But the before the CA because: (1) a petition for certiorari and prohibition
RTC, instead, continued with the presentation of the prosecution’s under Rule 65 is directed against any tribunal, board or officer
evidence and issued the assailed September 5, 2006 order. exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions alleged to have acted
without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse
Under this circumstance, the RTC’s September 5, 2006 order was of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction;24 and (2)
actually without force and effect and would not serve as basis for the petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by the respondent
the petitioners to claim that their right against double jeopardy is a special civil action separate and independent from the bigamy
had been violated. The RTC, clearly, acted with grave abuse of case filed against the petitioners. For these reasons, the "People
discretion in issuing its September 5, 2006 order in view ofthe of the Philippines" need not be impleaded as a party in a petition
earlier TRO issued by the CA. for certiorari and prohibition.
Second, the petitioners argue that the CA gravely erred when it WHEREFOR£, in view of the foregoing, we DENY the present
ruled that: the RTC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing petition for review on certiorari due to lack of merit, and hereby
its March 3, 2006 resolution disqualifying Atty. Atencia as private AFFIRM the decision dated July 30, 2010 and resolution dated
prosecutor, and that Atty. Atencia’s disqualification violatedthe April 8, 2011 ofthe Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 93807.
respondent’s rights to intervene and be heard in the bigamy case.
They contend that, even with Atty. Atencia’s disqualification, the SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 192912 October 22, 2014 WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS with MODIFICATIONS the a) Law
Decision dated February 2, 2010 ofthe Court of Appeals in CA-G.R.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, CEB CR.-H.C. No. 00465. The accused-appellant is found GUILTY b) Contracts
vs. beyond reasonable doubt of one count of rape and is sentenced
DEMOCRITO PARAS, Accused-Appellant. c) Quasi-contracts
to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The accused-appellant
is ORDERED to pay AAA Fifty Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00) as civil d) x x x
RESOLUTION
indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00) as moral damages,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.: and Thirty Thousand Pesos (₱30,000.00) as exemplary damages, e) Quasi-delicts
plus legal interest on all damages awarded at the rate of 6% per
The accused-appellant Democrito Paras was charged with one annum from the date of finality of this Decision. 3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2
count of rape before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Toledo City, above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by
Branch 29, in Criminal Case No. TCS-2729, which crime was Costs against the accused-appellant.8 way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule
allegedly committed against AAA1 who was 17 years old at the 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. This
In a letter9 dated August 18, 2014, however, Police separate civil action may be enforced either against the
time of the incident in March 1996.
Superintendent (P/Supt.) I Roberto R. Rabo, Officer-in-Charge, executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending
After trial on the merits, the R TC rendered its Decision2 dated New Bilibid Prison, informed the Court that the accused-appellant on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as
October 18, 2005, which found the accused-appellant guilty of the had died at the New Bilibid Prison Hospital in Muntinlupa City on explained above.
crime charged. The dispositive portion of the RTC judgment January 24, 2013. Attached to the letter is a certified true copy of
states: the Death Certificate10 of the accusedappellant, stating that he 4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of
died of pulmonary tuberculosis at 8:45 p.m. on January 24, 2013. his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases
WHEREFORE, all the foregoing considered, this Court finds the The Court received P/Supt. I Rabo’s letter only on August 27, where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to
guilt of the accused DEMOCRITO PARAS to have been proved 2014. its extinction, the private-offended party instituted together there
beyond peradventure of a reasonable doubt and he is hereby with the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitationson the
sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA and to Under Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the
indemnify the offended party [AAA] the sum of PS0,000.00 by way amended, the death of an accused pending his appeal criminal case, conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the
of compensatory damages plus the amount of Pl00,000.00 as and extinguishes both his criminal and civil liability ex delicto. Said Civil Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a
for moral damages.3 provision reads: possible privation of right byprescription. (Citations omitted;
emphasis ours.)
On appeal, the Court of Appeals upheld the judgment of the trial Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. – Criminal
court in a Decision4 dated February 2, 2010 in CA-G.R. CEB CR.- liability is totally extinguished: Thus, upon the death of the accused pending appeal of his
H.C. No. 00465. The appellate court decreed: WHEREFORE, conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as
premises considered the Decision dated October 18, 2005 of the no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action
to pecuniary penalties, liability therefore is extinguished only
Regional Trial Court, Branch 29, Toledo City, in Criminal Case No. instituted therein for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso
when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment[.]
TCS-2729 is hereby AFFIRMEDwith MODIFICATION. facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal action.12
The Court, in People v. Bayotas,11 enunciated the following
As modified, accused-appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable In this case, when the accused-appellant died on January 24,
guidelines construing the above provision in case the accused dies
doubt of the crime of qualified rape as defined and penalized in 2013, his appeal to this Court was still pending.1âwphi1 The
before final judgment:
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 Decision dated June 4, 2014 was thereafter promulgated as the
of Republic Act No. 7659, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction Court was not immediately informed of the accused-appellant's
penalty of reclusion perpetua. Accused-appellant is ordered to extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based death.
pay the private complainant the amount of ₱50,000.00 only as solely thereon. As opined by Justice Regalado, in this regard, "the
moral damages plus exemplary damages in the amount of The death of the accused-appellant herein, thus, extinguished his
death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his
₱25,000.00. The award of civil indemnity in the amount of criminal liability, as well as his civil liability directly arising from
criminal liability and only the civil liability directly arising from and
₱50,000.00 stands.5 and based solely on the crime committed.
based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex delicto
in senso strictiore." Accordingly, the Court's Decision dated June 4, 2014 had been
On February 15, 2010, the accused-appellant appealed6 the above
decision to this Court. rendered ineffectual and the same must therefore be set aside.
2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding
The criminal case against the accused-appellant must also be
the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a
On June 4, 2014, the Court promulgated its Decision,7 affirming dismissed.
source of obligation other than delict. Article1157 of the Civil
the judgment of conviction against the accused-appellant in this
Code enumerates these other sources of obligation from which WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVES to SET ASIDE its Decision dated
wise:
the civil liability may arise as a result of the same act or omission: June 4, 2014 and DISMISS Criminal Case No. TCS-2729 before the
RTC of Toledo City, Branch 29, by reason of the death of the
accusedappellant Democrito Paras on January 24, 2013.
SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 192912 October 22, 2014 WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS with MODIFICATIONS the a) Law
Decision dated February 2, 2010 ofthe Court of Appeals in CA-G.R.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, CEB CR.-H.C. No. 00465. The accused-appellant is found GUILTY b) Contracts
vs. beyond reasonable doubt of one count of rape and is sentenced
DEMOCRITO PARAS, Accused-Appellant. c) Quasi-contracts
to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The accused-appellant
is ORDERED to pay AAA Fifty Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00) as civil d) x x x
RESOLUTION
indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00) as moral damages,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.: and Thirty Thousand Pesos (₱30,000.00) as exemplary damages, e) Quasi-delicts
plus legal interest on all damages awarded at the rate of 6% per
The accused-appellant Democrito Paras was charged with one annum from the date of finality of this Decision. 3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2
count of rape before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Toledo City, above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by
Branch 29, in Criminal Case No. TCS-2729, which crime was Costs against the accused-appellant.8 way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule
allegedly committed against AAA1 who was 17 years old at the 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. This
In a letter9 dated August 18, 2014, however, Police separate civil action may be enforced either against the
time of the incident in March 1996.
Superintendent (P/Supt.) I Roberto R. Rabo, Officer-in-Charge, executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending
After trial on the merits, the R TC rendered its Decision2 dated New Bilibid Prison, informed the Court that the accused-appellant on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as
October 18, 2005, which found the accused-appellant guilty of the had died at the New Bilibid Prison Hospital in Muntinlupa City on explained above.
crime charged. The dispositive portion of the RTC judgment January 24, 2013. Attached to the letter is a certified true copy of
states: the Death Certificate10 of the accusedappellant, stating that he 4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of
died of pulmonary tuberculosis at 8:45 p.m. on January 24, 2013. his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases
WHEREFORE, all the foregoing considered, this Court finds the The Court received P/Supt. I Rabo’s letter only on August 27, where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to
guilt of the accused DEMOCRITO PARAS to have been proved 2014. its extinction, the private-offended party instituted together there
beyond peradventure of a reasonable doubt and he is hereby with the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitationson the
sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA and to Under Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the
indemnify the offended party [AAA] the sum of PS0,000.00 by way amended, the death of an accused pending his appeal criminal case, conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the
of compensatory damages plus the amount of Pl00,000.00 as and extinguishes both his criminal and civil liability ex delicto. Said Civil Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a
for moral damages.3 provision reads: possible privation of right byprescription. (Citations omitted;
emphasis ours.)
On appeal, the Court of Appeals upheld the judgment of the trial Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. – Criminal
court in a Decision4 dated February 2, 2010 in CA-G.R. CEB CR.- liability is totally extinguished: Thus, upon the death of the accused pending appeal of his
H.C. No. 00465. The appellate court decreed: WHEREFORE, conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and as
premises considered the Decision dated October 18, 2005 of the no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action
to pecuniary penalties, liability therefore is extinguished only
Regional Trial Court, Branch 29, Toledo City, in Criminal Case No. instituted therein for the recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso
when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment[.]
TCS-2729 is hereby AFFIRMEDwith MODIFICATION. facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal action.12
The Court, in People v. Bayotas,11 enunciated the following
As modified, accused-appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable In this case, when the accused-appellant died on January 24,
guidelines construing the above provision in case the accused dies
doubt of the crime of qualified rape as defined and penalized in 2013, his appeal to this Court was still pending.1âwphi1 The
before final judgment:
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 Decision dated June 4, 2014 was thereafter promulgated as the
of Republic Act No. 7659, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction Court was not immediately informed of the accused-appellant's
penalty of reclusion perpetua. Accused-appellant is ordered to extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based death.
pay the private complainant the amount of ₱50,000.00 only as solely thereon. As opined by Justice Regalado, in this regard, "the
moral damages plus exemplary damages in the amount of The death of the accused-appellant herein, thus, extinguished his
death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his
₱25,000.00. The award of civil indemnity in the amount of criminal liability, as well as his civil liability directly arising from
criminal liability and only the civil liability directly arising from and
₱50,000.00 stands.5 and based solely on the crime committed.
based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex delicto
in senso strictiore." Accordingly, the Court's Decision dated June 4, 2014 had been
On February 15, 2010, the accused-appellant appealed6 the above
decision to this Court. rendered ineffectual and the same must therefore be set aside.
2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding
The criminal case against the accused-appellant must also be
the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a
On June 4, 2014, the Court promulgated its Decision,7 affirming dismissed.
source of obligation other than delict. Article1157 of the Civil
the judgment of conviction against the accused-appellant in this
Code enumerates these other sources of obligation from which WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVES to SET ASIDE its Decision dated
wise:
the civil liability may arise as a result of the same act or omission: June 4, 2014 and DISMISS Criminal Case No. TCS-2729 before the
RTC of Toledo City, Branch 29, by reason of the death of the
accusedappellant Democrito Paras on January 24, 2013.
SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 181658, August 07, 2013 for Manila; (2) that said owner’s copy of TCT No. 232238 was xxxx
inadvertently lost or misplaced from his files and he discovered
LEE PUE LIONG A.K.A. PAUL LEE, Petitioner, v. CHUA PUE CHIN such loss in May 1999; (3) he exerted diligent efforts in locating 6. On August 18, 1999, Paul Lee testified under oath that TCT No.
LEE, Respondent. the said title but it had not been found and is already beyond 232238 was inadvertently lost and misplaced from his files.
recovery; and (4) said title had not been the subject of mortgage
DECISION
or used as collateral for the payment of any obligation with any xxxx
VILLARAMA, JR., J.: person, credit or banking institution. Petitioner likewise testified
in support of the foregoing averments during an ex-parte 7. Paul Lee made a willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood in
proceeding. In its Order12 dated September 17, 1999, the RTC his verified petition, affidavit and testimony, as he perfectly knew
granted the petition and directed the Register of Deeds of Manila that I was in possession of the owner’s duplicate copy of TCT No.
Before this Court is a petition1 for review on certiorari under Rule to issue a new Owner’s Duplicate Copy of TCT No. 232238 in lieu 232238.
45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, seeking the of the lost one.
reversal of the May 31, 2007 Decision2 and the January 31, 2008 8. I and my brother Nixon Lee opposed the petition of Paul Lee
Resolution3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 81510. Respondent, joined by her brother Nixon Lee, filed an Omnibus and even produced in open court the owner’s duplicate copy of
The CA affirmed the Orders4 dated August 15, 2003 and Motion praying, among others, that the September 17, 1999 TCT No. 232238.
November 5, 2003 of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Order be set aside claiming that petitioner knew fully well that
Manila denying (a) the Omnibus Motion5for the exclusion of a respondent was in possession of the said Owner’s Duplicate Copy, Such fact was contained in the Order of Branch 4, RTC, Manila,
private prosecutor in the two criminal cases for perjury pending the latter being the Corporate Treasurer and custodian of vital dated November 12, 1999, x x x.
before the MeTC, and (b) the Motion for Reconsideration6 of the documents of CHI. Respondent added that petitioner merely
said order denying the Omnibus Motion, respectively. needs to have another copy of the title because he planned to 9. I and Paul Lee are involved in an intra-corporate dispute, which
mortgage the same with the Planters Development Bank. dispute is now pending with the SEC.
The facts follow:cralawlibrary Respondent even produced the Owner’s Duplicate Copy of TCT
No. 232238 in open court. Thus, on November 12, 1999, the RTC 10. Paul Lee needed to have a new owner’s duplicate of the
Petitioner Lee Pue Liong, a.k.a. Paul Lee, is the President of recalled and set aside its September 17, 1999 Order.13cralaw aforementioned TCT so that he could mortgage the property
Centillion Holdings, Inc. (CHI), a company affiliated with the CKC virtualaw library covered thereby with the Planters Development Bank, even
Group of Companies (CKC Group) which includes the pioneer without my knowledge and consent as well as the consent and
company Clothman Knitting Corporation (CKC). The CKC Group is In a Complaint-Affidavit14 dated May 9, 2000 filed before the City knowledge of my brother Nixon Lee who is likewise a shareholder,
the subject of intra-corporate disputes between petitioner and his Prosecutor of Manila, respondent alleged the following: board member and officer of CHI.
siblings, including herein respondent Chua Pue Chin Lee, a
majority stockholder and Treasurer of CHI. 1. I am a stockholder, Board Member, and duly elected treasurer 11. If not for the timely discovery of the petition of Paul Lee, with
of Centillion Holdings, Inc. (CHI), which corporation is duly his perjurious misrepresentation, a new owner’s duplicate could
On July 19, 1999, petitioner’s siblings including respondent and organized and existing under Philippine laws. have been issued.
some unidentified persons took over and barricaded themselves
inside the premises of a factory owned by CKC. Petitioner and 2. As duly elected treasurer of CHI, I was tasked with the custody x x x x15 (Italics supplied.)
other factory employees were unable to enter the factory and safekeeping of all vital financial documents including bank
premises. This incident led to the filing of Criminal Case Nos. 971- accounts, securities, and land titles. On June 7, 2000, respondent executed a Supplemental
V-99, 55503 to 55505 against Nixon Lee and 972-V-99 against Affidavit16 to clarify that she was accusing petitioner of perjury
Nixon Lee, Andy Lee, Chua Kipsi a.k.a. Jensen Chua and 3. Among the land titles in my custody was the Owner’s Duplicate allegedly committed on the following occasions: (1) by declaring in
respondent, which are now pending in different courts in copy of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 232238 registered in the the VERIFICATION the veracity of the contents in his petition filed
Valenzuela City.7cralaw virtualaw library name of CHI. with the RTC of Manila concerning his claim that TCT No. 232238
was in his possession but was lost; (2) by declaring under oath in
On June 14, 1999, petitioner on behalf of CHI (as per the 4. On June 14, 1999, Lee Pue Liong, a.k.a. Paul Lee, filed a his affidavit of loss that said TCT was lost; and (3) by testifying
Secretary’s Certificate8 issued by Virginia Lee on even date) VERIFIED PETITION for the issuance of a new owner’s duplicate under oath that the said TCT was inadvertently lost from his files.
caused the filing of a verified Petition9 for the Issuance of an copy of the aforementioned certificate claiming under oath that
Owner’s Duplicate Copy of Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. said duplicate copy was in his custody but was lost. The Investigating Prosecutor recommended the dismissal of the
23223810 which covers a property owned by CHI. The case was case. However, in the Review Resolution17 dated December 1,
docketed as LRC Record No. 4004 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) xxxx 2000 issued by First Assistant City Prosecutor Eufrosino A. Sulla,
of Manila, Branch 4. Petitioner submitted before the said court an the recommendation to dismiss the case was set aside.
Affidavit of Loss11 stating that: (1) by virtue of his position as 5. Paul Lee likewise executed an affidavit of loss stating the same Thereafter, said City Prosecutor filed the Informations18 docketed
President of CHI, he had in his custody and possession the owner’s fact of loss, which affidavit he used and presented as exhibit “D”. as Criminal Case Nos. 352270-71 CR for perjury, punishable under
duplicate copy of TCT No. 232238 issued by the Register of Deeds Article 18319of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, against
petitioner before the MeTC of Manila, Branch 28. and he is deprived of such right only when he waives the civil
action or reserves his right to institute one. Such is not the WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS
At the trial, Atty. Augusto M. Macam appeared as counsel for situation in this case. The case at bar involves a public crime and COMMITTED A GRAVE ERROR WHEN IT UPHELD THE RESOLUTION
respondent and as private prosecutor with the consent and under the private prosecution has asserted its right to intervene in the OF THE METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT THAT THERE IS A PRIVATE
the control and supervision of the public prosecutor. After the proceedings, subject to the direction and control of the public OFFENDED PARTY IN THE CRIME OF PERJURY, A CRIME AGAINST
prosecution’s presentation of its first witness in the person of prosecutor.26cralaw virtualaw library PUBLIC INTEREST; AND
Atty. Ronaldo Viesca, Jr.,20 a lawyer from the Land Registration
Authority, petitioner’s counsel moved in open court that The MeTC also denied petitioner’s motion for II
respondent and her lawyer in this case should be excluded from reconsideration.27cralaw virtualaw library
participating in the case since perjury is a public offense. Said
Petitioner sought relief from the CA via a WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED
motion was vehemently opposed by Atty. Macam.21 In its
petition28 for certiorari with a prayer for the issuance of a writ of WHEN IT UPHELD THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE LOWER
Order22 dated May 7, 2003, the MeTC gave both the defense and
preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. Petitioner COURT WHICH IN TURN UPHELD THE RIGHT OF RESPONDENT, AN
the prosecution the opportunity to submit their motion and
prayed, among others, for the CA to enjoin the MeTC and ALLEGED STOCKHOLDER OF CHI, TO INTERVENE IN THE CRIMINAL
comment respectively as regards the issue raised by petitioner’s
respondent from enforcing the MeTC Orders dated August 15, CASE FOR PERJURY AS PRIVATE COMPLAINANT ON BEHALF OF
counsel.
2003 and November 5, 2003, and likewise to enjoin the MeTC and THE CORPORATION WITHOUT ITS AUTHORITY.36cralaw virtualaw
respondent from further allowing the private prosecutor to library
Complying with the MeTC’s directive, petitioner filed the
aforementioned Omnibus Motion23 asserting that in the crime of participate in the proceedings below while the instant case is
Petitioner claims that the crime of perjury, a crime against public
perjury punishable under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, as pending.
interest, does not offend any private party but is a crime which
amended, there is no mention of any private offended party. As only offends the public interest in the fair and orderly
such, a private prosecutor cannot intervene for the prosecution in By Decision29 dated May 31, 2007, the CA ruled in favor of
administration of laws. He opines that perjury is a felony where no
this case. Petitioner argued that perjury is a crime against public respondent, holding that the presence of the private prosecutor
civil liability arises on the part of the offender because there are
interest as provided under Section 2, Chapter 2, Title IV, Book 2 of who was under the control and supervision of the public
no damages to be compensated and that there is no private
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, where the offended party is prosecutor during the criminal proceedings of the two perjury
person injured by the crime.
the State alone. Petitioner posited that there being no allegation cases is not proscribed by the rules. The CA ratiocinated that
of damage to private interests, a private prosecutor is not needed. respondent is no stranger to the perjury cases as she is the private
Petitioner argues that the CA’s invocation of our pronouncement
On the other hand, the Prosecution filed its Opposition24 to complainant therein, hence, an aggrieved party.30 Reiterating the
in Lim Tek Goan, cited by Justice Regalado in his book, is
petitioner’s Omnibus Motion. MeTC’s invocation of our ruling in Lim Tek Goan v. Yatco31 as cited
inaccurate since the private offended party must have a civil
by former Supreme Court Associate Justice Florenz D. Regalado in
interest in the criminal case in order to intervene through a
The MeTC denied the Omnibus Motion in the Order25 dated his Remedial Law Compendium,32 the CA ruled that “the offended
private prosecutor. Dissecting Lim Tek Goan, petitioner points out
August 15, 2003, as follows: party, who has neither reserved, waived, nor instituted the civil
that said case involved the crime of grave threats where Lim Tek
action may intervene, and such right to intervene exists even
Goan himself was one of the offended parties. Thus, even if the
[W]hile criminal actions, as a rule, are prosecuted under the when no civil liability is involved.”33cralaw virtualaw library
crime of grave threats did not have any civil liability to be
direction and control of the public prosecutor, however, an
satisfied, petitioner claims that Lim Tek Goan, as a matter of right,
offended party may intervene in the proceeding, personally or by Without passing upon the merits of the perjury cases, the CA
may still intervene because he was one of the offended parties.
attorney, especially in cases of offenses which cannot be declared that respondent’s property rights and interests as the
prosecuted except at the instance of the offended party. The only treasurer and a stockholder of CHI were disturbed and/or
Petitioner submits that the MeTC erred in allowing the private
exception to this rule is when the offended party waives his right threatened by the alleged acts of petitioner. Further, the CA
prosecutor to represent respondent in this case despite the fact
to [file the] civil action or expressly reserves his right to institute it opined that petitioner’s right to a fair trial is not violated because
that the latter was not the offended party and did not suffer any
after the termination of the case, in which case he loses his right the presence of the private prosecutor in these cases does not
damage as she herself did not allege nor claim in her Complaint-
to intervene upon the theory that he is deemed to have lost his exclude the presence of the public prosecutor who remains to
Affidavit and Supplemental Affidavit that she or CHI suffered any
interest in its prosecution. And, in any event, whenever an have the prosecuting authority, subjecting the private prosecutor
damage that may be satisfied through restitution,37 reparation for
offended party intervenes in the prosecution of a criminal action, to his control and supervision.
the damage caused38and indemnification for consequential
his intervention must always be subject to the direction and
damages.39 Lastly, petitioner asserts that respondent is not the
control of the public prosecutor. (Lim Tek Goan vs. Yatco, 94 Phil. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration34 but the CA denied
proper offended party that may intervene in this case as she was
197). it under Resolution35 dated January 31, 2008.
not authorized by CHI. Thus, he prayed, among others, that Atty.
Macam or any private prosecutor for that matter be excluded
Apparently, the law makes no distinction between cases that are Hence, this petition raising the following issues:
from the prosecution of the criminal cases, and that all
public in nature and those that can only be prosecuted at the
I proceedings undertaken wherein Atty. Macam intervened be set
instance of the offended party. In either case, the law gives to the
aside and that the same be taken anew by the public prosecutor
offended party the right to intervene, personally or by counsel,
alone.40cralaw virtualaw library
public or private, is the party to whom the offender is civilly liable, City Prosecutor against petitioner and his wife. After private
On the other hand, respondent counters that the presence and and therefore the private individual to whom the offender is civilly respondent’s testimony was heard during the trial, petitioner
intervention of the private prosecutor in the perjury cases are not liable is the offended party. moved to exclude her counsels as private prosecutors on the
prohibited by the rules, stressing that she is, in fact, an aggrieved ground that she failed to allege and prove any civil liability in the
party, being a stockholder, an officer and the treasurer of CHI and In Ramiscal, Jr. v. Hon. Sandiganbayan,45 we also held that case. The MeTC granted the motion and ordered the exclusion of
the private complainant. Thus, she submits that pursuant to our said private prosecutors. On certiorari to the RTC, said court
ruling in Lim Tek Goan she has the right to intervene even if no Under Section 16, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal reversed the MeTC and ordered the latter to allow the private
civil liability exists in this case.41cralaw virtualaw library Procedure, the offended party may also be a private individual prosecutors in the prosecution of the civil aspect of the criminal
whose person, right, house, liberty or property case. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari in the CA which
The petition has no merit. was actually or directly injured by the same punishable act or dismissed his petition and affirmed the assailed RTC ruling.
omission of the accused, or that corporate entity which is
Generally, the basis of civil liability arising from crime is the damaged or injured by the delictual acts complained of. Such When the case was elevated to this Court, we sustained the CA in
fundamental postulate of our law that “[e]very person criminally party must be one who has a legal right; a substantial interest in allowing the private prosecutors to actively participate in the trial
liable x x x is also civilly liable.”42 Underlying this legal principle is the subject matter of the action as will entitle him to recourse of the criminal case. Thus:
the traditional theory that when a person commits a crime, he under the substantive law, to recourse if the evidence is sufficient
offends two entities, namely (1) the society in which he lives in or or that he has the legal right to the demand and the accused will Petitioner cites the case of Tan, Jr. v. Gallardo, holding that where
the political entity, called the State, whose law he has violated; be protected by the satisfaction of his civil liabilities. Such interest from the nature of the offense or where the law defining and
and (2) the individual member of that society whose person, right, must not be a mere expectancy, subordinate or inconsequential. punishing the offense charged does not provide for an indemnity,
honor, chastity or property was actually or directly injured or The interest of the party must be personal; and not one based on the offended party may not intervene in the prosecution of the
damaged by the same punishable act or omission.43cralaw a desire to vindicate the constitutional right of some third and offense.
virtualaw library unrelated party.46 (Emphasis supplied.)
Petitioner’s contention lacks merit. Generally, the basis of civil
In this case, the statement of petitioner regarding his custody of liability arising from crime is the fundamental postulate that every
Section 1, Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as
TCT No. 232238 covering CHI’s property and its loss through man criminally liable is also civilly liable. When a person commits
amended, provides:
inadvertence, if found to be perjured is, without doubt, injurious a crime he offends two entities namely (1) the society in which he
SECTION 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions.—(a) When a to respondent’s personal credibility and reputation insofar as her lives in or the political entity called the State whose law he has
criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil faithful performance of the duties and responsibilities of a Board violated; and (2) the individual member of the society whose
liability arising from the offense charged shall be deemed Member and Treasurer of CHI. The potential injury to the person, right, honor, chastity or property has been actually or
instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party corporation itself is likewise undeniable as the court-ordered directly injured or damaged by the same punishable act or
waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately issuance of a new owner’s duplicate of TCT No. 232238 was only omission. An act or omission is felonious because it is punishable
or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. averted by respondent’s timely discovery of the case filed by by law, it gives rise to civil liability not so much because it is a
petitioner in the RTC. crime but because it caused damage to another.Additionally,
x x x x (Emphasis supplied) what gives rise to the civil liability is really the obligation and the
Even assuming that no civil liability was alleged or proved in the moral duty of everyone to repair or make whole the damage
For the recovery of civil liability in the criminal action, the perjury case being tried in the MeTC, this Court declared in the caused to another by reason of his own act or omission, whether
appearance of a private prosecutor is allowed under Section 16 early case of Lim Tek Goan v. Yatco,47 cited by both MeTC and CA, done intentionally or negligently. The indemnity which a person is
of Rule 110: that whether public or private crimes are involved, it is erroneous sentenced to pay forms an integral part of the penalty imposed by
for the trial court to consider the intervention of the offended law for the commission of the crime. The civil action involves the
SEC. 16. Intervention of the offended party in criminal action.— party by counsel as merely a matter of tolerance. Thus, where the civil liability arising from the offense charged which includes
Where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in private prosecution has asserted its right to intervene in the restitution, reparation of the damage caused, and indemnification
the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party may proceedings, that right must be respected. The right reserved by for consequential damages.
intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the offense. (Emphasis the Rules to the offended party is that of intervening for the sole
supplied.) purpose of enforcing the civil liability born of the criminal act and Under the Rules, where the civil action for recovery of civil liability
not of demanding punishment of the accused. Such intervention, is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the
Section 12, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,
moreover, is always subject to the direction and control of the offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the
as amended, defines an offended party as “the person against
public prosecutor.48cralaw virtualaw library offense. Rule 111(a) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides
whom or against whose property the offense was committed.”
In Garcia v. Court of Appeals,44 this Court rejected petitioner’s that, “[w]hen a criminal action is instituted, the civil action arising
In Chua v. Court of Appeals,49 as a result of the complaint-affidavit from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the
theory that it is only the State which is the offended party in
filed by private respondent who is also the corporation’s criminal action unless the offended party waives the civil action,
public offenses like bigamy. We explained that from the language
Treasurer, four counts of falsification of public documents reserves the right to institute it separately, or institutes the civil
of Section 12, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court, it is reasonable to
(Minutes of Annual Stockholder’s Meeting) was instituted by the action prior to the criminal action.”
assume that the offended party in the commission of a crime,
Private respondent did not waive the civil action, nor did she
reserve the right to institute it separately, nor institute the civil
action for damages arising from the offense charged. Thus, we
find that the private prosecutors can intervene in the trial of the
criminal action.
In the case before us, there was neither a waiver nor a reservation
made; nor did the offended party institute a separate civil action.
It follows that evidence should be allowed in the criminal
proceedings to establish the civil liability arising from the offense
committed, and the private offended party has the right to
intervene through the private prosecutors.50 (Emphasis supplied;
citations omitted.)
In the light of the foregoing, we hold that the CA did not err in
holding that the MeTC committed no grave abuse of discretion
when it denied petitioner’s motion to exclude Atty. Macam as
private prosecutor in Crim. Case Nos. 352270-71 CR.
SO ORDERED
G.R. No. 202920 October 2, 2013 payment of filing fees that, in turn, contravenes Section 1(b) of We see nothing wrong or illegal in granting petitioner’s request.
the Rule 111 of the Rules of Court.10
RICHARD CHUA, Petitioner, First. The Executive Judge erred when she treated the
vs. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, but to no avail. entire₱540,668.00 as one indivisible obligation, when that figure
THE EXECUTIVE JUDGE, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, was nothing but the sum of individual filing fees due for each
MANILA, Respondent. Hence, this appeal. count of violation of BP Blg.22 filed before the MeTC. Granting
petitioner’s request would not constitute a deferment in the
DECISION OUR RULING
payment of filing fees, for the latter clearly intends to pay in full
Prefatorily, it must be pointed out that petitioner availed of the the filing fees of some, albeit not all, of the cases filed.
PEREZ, J.:
wrong remedy in assailing the Orders dated 26 June 2012 and 26
Filing fees, when required, are assessed and become due for each
At bench is a Petition for Review on Certiorari,1 assailing the July 2012 of the Executive Judge of the MeTC via the present
initiatory pleading filed.15 In criminal actions, these pleadings refer
Orders2 dated 26 June 2012 and 26 July 2012 of the Executive petition for review on certiorari. The assailed orders are not,
to the information filed in court.
Judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Manila, in UDK Nos. technically, final orders that are appealable,11 let alone the proper
12001457 to 96. subjects of an appeal by certiorari.12 The assailed orders do not, at In the instant case, there are a total of forty (40) counts of
least for the moment, completely dispose of the B.P. 22 cases filed violation of BP Blg. 22 that was filed before the
The facts: before the MeTC. MeTC.1âwphi1And each of the forty (40) was, in fact, assessed its
On 13 January 2012, herein petitioner Richard Chua tiled before filing fees, individually, based on the amount of check one
The correct remedy for the petitioner, in view of the unavailability
the Office of the City Prosecutor (OCP) of Manila, a complaint covers.16 Under the rules of criminal procedure, the filing of the
of an appeal or any other remedy in the ordinary course of law, is
charging one Letty Sy Gan of forty (40) counts of violation of Batas forty(40) counts is equivalent to the filing of forty (40) different
a certiorari petition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.13 But then
Pambansa Bilang (BP Blg.) 22 or the Bouncing Checks Law.3 After informations, as each count represents an independent violation
again, the petitioner should have filed such a petition, not directly
conducting preliminary investigation, the OCP found probable of BP Blg. 22.17 Filing fees are, therefore, due for each count and
with this Court, but before the appropriate Regional Trial Court
cause and, on 22 March 2012, filed forty (40) counts of violation may be paid for each count separately.
pursuant to the principle of hierarchy of courts.14
of BP Blg. 22 before the MeTC.4
Second. In an effort to justify her refusal of petitioner’s request,
In the weightier interest of substantial justice, however, this Court
Consequently, the MeTC informed petitioner that he has to pay a the Executive Judge further argues that since all forty (40) counts
forgives such procedural lapses and treats the instant appeal as a
totalof ₱540,668.00 as filing fees for all the forty (40) counts of of violation of BP Blg. 22 were brought about by a single
certiorari petition filed properly before this Court. To this Court,
violation of BP Blg. 22.5 Finding the said amount to be beyond his complaint filed before the OCP and are now consolidated before
the grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Executive Judge
means, petitioner consulted with the MeTC clerk of court to ask the court, the payment of their tiling fees should be made for all
was patent on the undisputed facts of this case and is serious
whether he could pay filing fees on a per case basis instead of or none at all.18
enough to warrant a momentary deviation from the procedural
being required to pay the total filing fees for all the BP Blg. 22 norm. That all forty (40) counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 all emanated
cases all at once.6 The MeTC clerk of court opined that petitioner
from a single complaint filed in the OCP is irrelevant. The fact
could not.7 Petitioner was thus unable to pay any filing fees. Thus, We come to the focal issue of whether the Executive Judge
remains that there are still forty (40) counts of violation of BP Blg.
of the MeTC committed grave abuse of discretion, in light of the
Due to non-payment of the required filing fees, the MeTC 22 that were filed before the MeTC and, as a consequence, forty
facts and circumstances herein obtaining, in refusing petitioner’s
designated the forty (40) counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 as (40) individual filing fees to be paid.
request of paying filing fees on a per case basis.
undocketed cases under UDK Nos. 12001457 to 96. Subsequently,
Neither would the consolidation of all forty (40) counts make any
the OCP moved for consolidation of the said cases.8 We answer in the affirmative. We grant the petition.
difference. Consolidation unifies criminal cases involving related
On 18 April 2012, petitioner filed before the Executive Judge of In proposing to pay filing fees on a per case basis, petitioner was offenses only for purposes of trial.19 Consolidation does not
the MeTC a motion entitled " not trying to evade or deny his obligation to pay for the filing fees transform the tiling fees due for each case consolidated into one
for all forty (40) counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 filed before the indivisible fee.
Urgent Motion to Allow Private Complainant to Pay Filing Fee on a MeTC. He, in fact, acknowledges such obligation. He, in fact,
Per Case Basis" (Urgent Motion).9 In it, petitioner reiterated his Third. Allowing petitioner to pay for the tiling fees of some of the
admits that he is incapable of fulfilling such obligation in its
request that he be allowed to pay filing fees on a per case basis forty ( 40) counts of violation of BP Big. 22 tiled before the MeTC,
entirety.
instead of being required to pay the total amount of filing fees in will concededly result into the absolute non-payment of the filing
its entirety. Rather, what petitioner is asking is that he at least be allowed to fees of the rest. The fate of the cases which filing fees were not
pursue some of the cases, the filing fees of which he is capable of paid, however, is already the concern of the MeTC.
On 26 June 2012, the Executive Judge issued an Order denying financing. Petitioner manifests that, given his current financial
petitioner’s Urgent Motion. In rebuffing petitioner’s Urgent WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is hereby
status, he simply cannot afford the filing fees for all the forty (40)
Motion, the Executive Judge of the MeTC ratiocinated that GRANTED. The assailed Orders dated 26 June 2012 and 26 July
BP Blg. 22 cases.
granting petitioner’s plea would constitute a deferment in the 2012 of the Executive Judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court,
Manila, in UDK Nos.12001457 to 96 are ANNULED and SET ASIDE.
The Metropolitan Trial Court, Manila, is hereby directed to accept
payments of tiling fees in UDK Nos. 12001457 to 96 on a per
information basis.
No costs.
SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 161075 July 15, 2013 Before Unicapital and Plus Builders could develop the property, Is the resolution of the Pasig civil case prejudicial to the Cavite and
they learned that the title to the property was really TCT No. Makati criminal cases?
RAFAEL JOSE-CONSING, JR., Petitioner, 114708 in the names of Po Willie Yu and Juanito Tan Teng, the
vs. parties from whom the property had been allegedly acquired by We hold that it is. The resolution of the issue in the Pasig case, i.e.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. de la Cruz. TCT No. 687599 held by De la Cruz appeared to be whether or not private respondent may be held liable in the
spurious.4 questioned transaction, will determine the guilt or innocence of
DECISION private respondent Consing in both the Cavite and Makati criminal
On its part, Unicapital demanded the return of the total amount cases.
BERSAMIN, J.:
of ₱41,377,851.48 as of April 19, 1999 that had been paid to and
received by de la Cruz and Consing, but the latter ignored the The analysis and comparison of the Pasig civil case, Makati
An independent civil action based on fraud initiated by the
demands.5 criminal case, Makati civil case and Cavite criminal case show that:
defrauded party does not raise a prejudicial question to stop the
(1) the parties are identical; (2) the transactions in controversy are
proceedings in a pending criminal prosecution of the defendant
On July 22, 1999, Consing filed Civil Case No. 1759 in the Pasig City identical; (3) the Transfer Certificate of Titles (TCT) involved are
for estafa through falsification. This is because the result of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) (Pasig civil case) for injunctive relief, identical; (4) the questioned Deeds of Sale/Mortgage are
independent civil action is irrelevant to the issue of guilt or
thereby seeking to enjoin Unicapital from proceeding against him identical; (5) the dates in question are identical; and (6) the issue
innocence of the accused.
for the collection of the ₱41,377,851.48 on the ground that he of private respondent’s culpability for the questioned transactions
The Case had acted as a mere agent of his mother. is identical in all the proceedings.
On appeal is the amended decision promulgated on August 18, On the same date, Unicapital initiated a criminal complaint for As discussed earlier, not only was the issue raised in the Pasig civil
2003,1 whereby the Court of Appeals (CA) granted the writ of estafa through falsification of public document against Consing case identical to or intimately related to the criminal cases in
certiorari upon petition by the State in C.A.-G.R. No. 71252 and de la Cruz in the Makati City Prosecutor’s Office.6 Cavite and Makati. The similarities also extend to the parties in
entitled People v. Han. Winlove M Dumayas, Presiding Judge, the cases and the TCT and Deed of Sale/ Mortgage involved in the
On August 6, 1999, Unicapital sued Consing in the RTC in Makati questioned transactions.
Branch 59, Regional Trial Court, Makati City and Rafael Consing,
City (Civil Case No. 99-1418) for the recovery of a sum of money
Jr., and set aside the assailed order issued on November 26, 2001
and damages, with an application for a writ of preliminary The respondent Judge, in ordering the suspension of the
by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 59, in Makati City
attachment (Makati civil case).7 arraignment of private respondent in the Makati case, in view of
deferring the arraignment of petitioner in Criminal Case No. 00-
CA-G.R. SP No. 63712, where Unicapital was not a party thereto,
120 entitled People v. Rafael Consing, Jr. upon his motion on the On January 27, 2000, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Makati did so pursuant to its mandatory power to take judicial notice of
ground of the existence of a prejudicial question in the civil cases City filed against Consing and De la Cruz an information for estafa an official act of another judicial authority. It was also a better
pending between him and the complainant in the trial courts in through falsification of public document in the RTC in Makati City legal tack to prevent multiplicity of action, to which our legal
Pasig City and Makati City. (Criminal Case No. 00-120), which was assigned to Branch 60 system abhors.
(Makati criminal case).8
Antecedents
Applying the Tuanda ruling, the pendency of CA-G.R. SP No. 63712
On February 15, 2001, Consing moved to defer his arraignment in may be validly invoked to suspend private respondent’s
Petitioner negotiated with and obtained for himself and his
the Makati criminal case on the ground of existence of a arraignment in the Makati City criminal case, notwithstanding the
mother, Cecilia de la Cruz (de la Cruz) various loans totaling
prejudicial question due to the pendency of the Pasig and Makati fact that CA-G.R. SP No. 63712 was an offshoot, merely, in the
₱18,000,000.00 from Unicapital Inc. (Unicapital). The loans were
civil cases. On September 25, 2001, Consing reiterated his motion Cavite criminal case.12
secured by a real estate mortgage constituted on a parcel of land
for deferment of his arraignment, citing the additional ground of
(property) covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-
pendency of CA-G.R. SP No. 63712 in the CA. On November 19, In the meanwhile, on October 13, 1999, Plus Builders commenced
687599 of the Registry of Deeds for the Province of Cavite
2001, the Prosecution opposed the motion.9 its own suit for damages against Consing (Civil Case No. 99-95381)
registered under the name of de la Cruz.2 In accordance with its
in the RTC in Manila (Manila civil case).13
option to purchase the mortgaged property, Unicapital agreed to On November 26, 2001, the RTC issued an order suspending the
purchase one-half of the property for a total consideration of proceedings in the Makati criminal case on the ground of the On January 21, 2000, an information for estafa through
₱21,221,500.00. Payment was effected by off-setting the amounts existence of a prejudicial question, and on March 18, 2001, the falsification of public document was filed against Consing and De
due to RTC denied the Prosecution’s motion for reconsideration.10 la Cruz in the RTC in Imus, Cavite, docketed as Criminal Case No.
7668-00 and assigned to Branch 21 (Cavite criminal case). Consing
Unicapital under the promissory notes of de la Cruz and Consing in The State thus assailed in the CA the last two orders of the RTC in filed a motion to defer the arraignment on the ground of the
the amount of ₱18,000,000.00 and paying an additional amount the Makati criminal case via petition for certiorari (C.A.-G.R. SP existence of a prejudicial question, i.e., the pendency of the Pasig
of ₱3,145,946.50. The other half of the property was purchased No. 71252). and Manila civil cases. On January 27, 2000, however, the RTC
by Plus Builders, Inc. (Plus Builders), a joint venture partner of
handling the Cavite criminal case denied Consing’s motion. Later
Unicapital.3 On May 20, 2003, the CA promulgated its decision in C.A.-G.R. SP
on, it also denied his motion for reconsideration. Thereafter,
No. 71252,11 dismissing the petition for certiorari and upholding
Consing commenced in the CA a special civil action for certiorari
the RTC’s questioned orders, explaining:
with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order the criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of in G.R. No. 148193, supra, to the effect that the Pasig and Manila
(TRO) and/or writ of preliminary injunction (C.A.-G.R. SP No. evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party recover civil cases did not present a prejudicial question that justified the
63712), seeking to enjoin his arraignment and trial in the Cavite damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the suspension of the proceedings in the Cavite criminal case, and
criminal case. The CA granted the TRO on March 19, 2001, and criminal action. claiming that under the ruling in G.R. No. 148193, the Pasig and
later promulgated its decision on May 31, 2001, granting Consing’ Makati civil cases did not raise a prejudicial question that would
petition for certiorari and setting aside the January 27, 2000 order Thus, in Rojas v. People, the petitioner was accused in a criminal cause the suspension of the Makati criminal case.
of the RTC, and permanently enjoining the RTC from proceeding case for violation of Article 319 of the Revised Penal Code, for
with the arraignment and trial until the Pasig and Manila civil executing a new chattel mortgage on personal property in favor of In his opposition to the State’s motion for reconsideration,
cases had been finally decided. another party without consent of the previous mortgagee. Consing contended that the ruling in G.R. No. 148193 was not
Thereafter, the offended party filed a civil case for termination of binding because G.R. No. 148193 involved Plus Builders, which
Not satisfied, the State assailed the decision of the CA in this management contract, one of the causes of action of which was different from Unicapital, the complainant in the Makati
Court (G.R. No. 148193), praying for the reversal of the May 31, consisted of petitioner having executed a chattel mortgage while criminal case. He added that the decision in G.R. No. 148193 did
2001 decision of the CA. On January 16, 2003, the Court granted the previous chattel mortgage was still valid and subsisting. not yet become final and executory, and could still be reversed at
the petition for review in G.R. No. 148193, and reversed and set Petitioner moved that the arraignment and trial of the criminal any time, and thus should not control as a precedent to be relied
aside the May 31, 2001 decision of the CA,14 viz: case be held in abeyance on the ground that the civil case was a upon; and that he had acted as an innocent attorney-in-fact for
prejudicial question, the resolution of which was necessary before his mother, and should not be held personally liable under a
In the case at bar, we find no prejudicial question that would the criminal proceedings could proceed. The trial court denied the contract that had involved property belonging to his mother as his
justify the suspension of the proceedings in the criminal case (the suspension of the criminal case on the ground that no prejudicial principal.
Cavite criminal case). The issue in Civil Case No. SCA 1759 (the question exist. We affirmed the order of the trial court and ruled
Pasig civil case) for Injunctive Relief is whether or not respondent that: On August 18, 2003, the CA amended its decision, reversing itself.
(Consing) merely acted as an agent of his mother, Cecilia de la It relied upon the ruling in G.R. No. 148193, and held thusly:
Cruz; while in Civil Case No. 99-95381 (the Manila civil case), for … the resolution of the liability of the defendant in the civil case
Damages and Attachment, the question is whether respondent on the eleventh cause of action based on the fraudulent CA-G.R. SP No. 63712 is similar with the case at bench. The
and his mother are liable to pay damages and to return the misrepresentation that the chattel mortgage the defendant transactions in controversy, the documents involved; the issue of
amount paid by PBI for the purchase of the disputed lot. Even if executed in favor of the said CMS Estate, Inc. on February 20, the respondent’s culpability for the questioned transactions are
respondent is declared merely an agent of his mother in the 1957, that his D-6 "Caterpillar" Tractor with Serial No. 9-U-6565 all identical in all the proceedings; and it deals with the same
transaction involving the sale of the questioned lot, he cannot be was "free from all liens and encumbrances" will not determine the parties with the exception of private complainant Unicapital.
adjudged free from criminal liability. An agent or any person may criminal liability of the accused in the said Criminal Case No.
However, the Supreme Court, upon review of CA-G.R. SP No.
be held liable for conspiring to falsify public documents. Hence, 56042 for violation of paragraph 2 of Article 319 of the Revised
63712, People of the Philippines vs. Rafael Jose Consing, Jr. (G.R.
the determination of the issue involved in Civil Case No. SCA 1759 Penal Code. . . . (i) That, even granting for the sake of argument, a
No. 148193, January 16, 2003) held that "Civil Case No. 99-95381,
for Injunctive Relief is irrelevant to the guilt or innocence of the prejudicial question is involved in this case, the fact remains that
for Damages and attachment on account of alleged fraud
respondent in the criminal case for estafa through falsification of both the crime charged in the information in the criminal case and
committed by respondent and his mother in selling the disputed
public document. the eleventh cause of action in the civil case are based upon fraud,
lot to Plus Builders, Inc. is an independent civil action under
hence both the civil and criminal cases could proceed
Likewise, the resolution of PBI’s right to be paid damages and the Article 33 of the Civil Code. As such, it will not operate as a
independently of the other pursuant to Article 33 of the new Civil
purchase price of the lot in question will not be determinative of prejudicial question that will justify the suspension of the criminal
Code which provides: "In cases of defamation, fraud and physical
the culpability of the respondent in the criminal case for even if case at bar." In view of the aforementioned decision of the
injuries, a civil action for damages, entirely separate and distinct
PBI is held entitled to the return of the purchase price plus Supreme Court, We are thus amending Our May 20, 2003
from the criminal action shall proceed independently of the
damages, it does not ipso facto follow that respondent should be decision.
criminal prosecution, and shall require only a preponderance of
held guilty of estafa through falsification of public document. evidence." (j) That, therefore, the act of respondent judge in WHEREFORE, the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is
Stated differently, a ruling of the court in the civil case that PBI issuing the orders referred to in the instant petition was not made GRANTED. The Orders dated November 26, 2001 and March 18,
should not be paid the purchase price plus damages will not with "grave abuse of discretion." 2002 issued by the respondent Judge are hereby REVERSED and
necessarily absolve respondent of liability in the criminal case
SET ASIDE. Respondent Judge is hereby ordered to proceed with
where his guilt may still be established under penal laws as In the instant case, Civil Case No. 99-95381, for Damages and
the hearing of Criminal Case No. 00-120 with dispatch.
determined by other evidence. Attachment on account of the alleged fraud committed by
respondent and his mother in selling the disputed lot to PBI is an SO ORDERED.16
Moreover, neither is there a prejudicial question if the civil and independent civil action under Article 33 of the Civil Code. As
the criminal action can, according to law, proceed independently such, it will not operate as a prejudicial question that will justify Consing filed a motion for reconsideration,17 but the CA denied
of each other. Under Rule 111, Section 3 of the Revised Rules on the suspension of the criminal case at bar.15 the motion through the second assailed resolution of December
Criminal Procedure, in the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 11, 2003.18
and 2176 of the Civil Code, the independent civil action may be Turning back to the Makati criminal case, the State moved for the
brought by the offended party. It shall proceed independently of reconsideration of the adverse decision of the CA, citing the ruling Hence, this appeal by petition for review on certiorari.
Issue similarity between his case with Plus Builders and his case with Clearly, the Makati criminal case could not be suspended pending
Unicapital. the resolution of the Makati civil case that Unicapital had filed.
Petitioner reiterates his contention that the decision in G.R. No.
148193 was not controlling in relation to C.A.-G.R. No. 71252, A perusal of Unicapital’s complaint in the Makati civil case reveals As far as the Pasig civil case is concerned, the issue of Consing’s
which involved Plus Builders, not Unicapital, the complainant in that the action was predicated on fraud. This was apparent from being a mere agent of his mother who should not be criminally
Criminal Case No. 00-120. He posits that in arriving at its amended the allegations of Unicapital in its complaint to the effect that liable for having so acted due to the property involved having
decision, the CA did not consider the pendency of the Makati civil Consing and de la Cruz had acted in a "wanton, fraudulent, belonged to his mother as principal has also been settled in G.R.
case (Civil Case No. 99-1418), which raised a prejudicial question, oppressive, or malevolent manner in offering as security and later No. 148193, to wit:
considering that the resolution of such civil action would include object of sale, a property which they do not own, and foisting to
the issue of whether he had falsified a certificate of title or had the public a spurious title."22 As such, the action was one that In the case at bar, we find no prejudicial question that would
willfully defrauded Unicapital, the resolution of either of which could proceed independently of Criminal Case No. 00-120 justify the suspension of the proceedings in the criminal case (the
would determine his guilt or innocence in Criminal Case No. 00- pursuant to Article 33 of the Civil Code, which states as follows: Cavite criminal case). The issue in Civil Case No. SCA 1759 (the
120. Pasig civil case) for Injunctive Relief is whether or not respondent
Article 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a (Consing) merely acted as an agent of his mother, Cecilia de la
In its comment,19 the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) civil action for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the Cruz; while in Civil Case No. 99-95381 (the Manila civil case), for
counters that Unicapital brought the Makati civil case as an criminal action, may be brought by the injured party. Such civil Damages and Attachment, the question is whether respondent
independent civil action intended to exact civil liability separately action shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution, and his mother are liable to pay damages and to return the
from Criminal Case No. 00-120 in a manner fully authorized under and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. amount paid by PBI for the purchase of the disputed lot. Even if
Section 1(a) and Section 2, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court.20 It respondent is declared merely an agent of his mother in the
argues that the CA correctly took cognizance of the ruling in G.R. It is well settled that a civil action based on defamation, fraud and transaction involving the sale of the questioned lot, he cannot be
No. 148193, holding in its challenged amended decision that the physical injuries may be independently instituted pursuant to adjudged free from criminal liability. An agent or any person may
Makati civil case, just like the Manila civil case, was an Article 33 of the Civil Code, and does not operate as a prejudicial be held liable for conspiring to falsify public documents. Hence,
independent civil action instituted by virtue of Article 33 of the question that will justify the suspension of a criminal case.23 This the determination of the issue involved in Civil Case No. SCA 1759
Civil Code; that the Makati civil case did not raise a prejudicial was precisely the Court’s thrust in G.R. No. 148193, thus: for Injunctive Relief is irrelevant to the guilt or innocence of the
question that justified the suspension of Criminal Case No. 00- respondent in the criminal case for estafa through falsification of
Moreover, neither is there a prejudicial question if the civil and
120; and that as finally settled in G.R. No. 148193, the Pasig civil public document.25 (Words in parentheses supplied; bold
the criminal action can, according to law, proceed independently
case did not also raise any prejudicial question, because the sole underscoring supplied for emphasis)
of each other. Under Rule 111, Section 3 of the Revised Rules on
issue thereat was whether Consing, as the mere agent of his
Criminal Procedure, in the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the amended decision
mother, had any obligation or liability toward Unicapital.
and 2176 of the Civil Code, the independent civil action may be promulgated on August 18, 2003; and ORDERS petitioner to pay
In his reply,21 Consing submits that the Pasig civil case that he filed brought by the offended party. It shall proceed independently of the costs of suit.
and Unicapital’s Makati civil case were not intended to delay the the criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of
resolution of Criminal Case No. 00-120, nor to pre-empt such evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party recover SO ORDERED.
resolution; and that such civil cases could be validly considered damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the
determinative of whether a prejudicial question existed to criminal action.
warrant the suspension of Criminal Case No. 00-120.
xxxx
Did the CA err in reversing itself on the issue of the existence of a
In the instant case, Civil Case No. 99-95381, for Damages and
prejudicial question that warranted the suspension of the
Attachment on account of the alleged fraud committed by
proceedings in the Makati criminal case?
respondent and his mother in selling the disputed lot to PBI is an
Ruling independent civil action under Article 33 of the Civil Code. As
such, it will not operate as a prejudicial question that will justify
The petition for review on certiorari is absolutely meritless. the suspension of the criminal case at bar.24
Consing has hereby deliberately chosen to ignore the firm holding Contrary to Consing’s stance, it was not improper for the CA to
in the ruling in G.R. No. 148193 to the effect that the proceedings apply the ruling in G.R. No. 148193 to his case with Unicapital, for,
in Criminal Case No. 00-120 could not be suspended because the although the Manila and Makati civil cases involved different
Makati civil case was an independent civil action, while the Pasig complainants (i.e., Plus Builders and Unicapital), the civil actions
civil case raised no prejudicial question. That was wrong for him to Plus Builders and Unicapital had separately instituted against him
do considering that the ruling fully applied to him due to the were undeniably of similar mold, i.e., they were both based on
fraud, and were thus covered by Article 33 of the Civil Code.
G.R. No. 183805, July 03, 2013 for bigamy filed against him on the ground that the second decision, but the same was denied in a Resolution7 dated July 24,
marriage between him and private respondent had already been 2008.
JAMES WALTER P. CAPILI, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE declared void by the RTC.
PHILIPPINES AND SHIRLEY TISMO-CAPILI, Respondents. Accordingly, petitioner filed the present petition for review
In an Order4 dated July 7, 2006, the RTC of Pasig City granted on certiorari alleging that:cralavvonlinelawlibrary
DECISION petitioner’s Manifestation and Motion to Dismiss, to
wit:cralavvonlinelawlibrary 1. THERE IS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE COURT OF APPEALS
PERALTA, J.: TO DISREGARD EXISTING JURISPRUDENCE
The motion is anchored on the allegation that this case should be PRONOUNCED BY THIS HONORABLE SUPREME COURT
Before us is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of
dismissed as a decision dated December 1, 2004 had already been AND TO REVERSE THE ORDER DATED JULY 7, 2006 OF
the Rules of Court seeking the reversal of the Decision1 dated
rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Antipolo City, Branch 72 in THE TRIAL COURT (REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, PASIG
February 1, 2008 and Resolution2 dated July 24, 2008 of the Court
Civil Case No. 01-6043 (entitled: “Karla Medina-Capili versus CITY, BRANCH 152) ISSUED IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.
of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 30444.
James Walter P. Capili and Shirley G. Tismo,” a case for 128370 GRANTING THE MOTION TO DISMISS THE CASE
declaration of nullity of marriage) nullifying the second marriage OF BIGAMY AGAINST PETITIONER, INASMUCH AS THE
The factual antecedents are as follows:cralavvonlinelawlibrary
between James Walter P. Capili and Shirley G. Tismo and said ISSUANCE OF THE SAID ORDER IS BASED ON THE
decision is already final. FINDINGS AND/OR FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE
On June 28, 2004, petitioner was charged with the crime of
DECISION OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF
bigamy before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City in an
In the opposition filed by the private prosecutor to the motion, it ANTIPOLO CITY, BRANCH 72, IN CIVIL CASE NO. 01-
Information which reads:cralavvonlinelawlibrary
was stated, among others, that the issues raised in the civil case 6043 AND THE CONCLUDING AND DISPOSITIVE
On or about December 8, 1999, in Pasig City, and within the are not similar or intimately related to the issue in this above- PORTION IN THE SAID DECISION WHICH STATES THAT,
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused being previously captioned case and that the resolution of the issues in said civil AFTER PERUSAL OF THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD AND
united in lawful marriage with Karla Y. Medina-Capili and without case would not determine whether or not the criminal action may THE TESTIMONIES OF WITNESSES X X X, THE
said marriage having been legally dissolved or annulled, did then proceed. MARRIAGE BETWEEN PETITIONER JAMES WALTER P.
and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously contract a second CAPILI AND PRIVATE RESPONDENT SHIRLEY G. TISMO,
marriage with Shirley G. Tismo, to the damage and prejudice of WHEREFORE, after a judicious evaluation of the issue and IS HEREBY NULL AND VOID.
the latter. arguments of the parties, this Court is of the humble opinion that
there is merit on the Motion to dismiss filed by the accused as it 2. THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED AND ABUSED
3 appears that the second marriage between James Walter P. Capili ITS DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OF
Contrary to law.
and Shirley G. Tismo had already been nullified by the Regional JURISDICTION IN HOLDING THAT THE DECLARATION OF
Trial Court, Branch 72 of Antipolo City which has declared “the NULLITY OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN PETITIONER JAMES
Petitioner thereafter filed a Motion to Suspend Proceedings voidness, non-existent or incipient invalidity” of the said second WALTER P. CAPILI AND SHIRLEY G. TISMO BY THE
alleging that: (1) there is a pending civil case for declaration of marriage. As such, this Court submits that there is no more REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ANTIPOLO CITY, BRANCH
nullity of the second marriage before the RTC of Antipolo City filed bigamy to speak of. 72 IN ITS DECISION IN CIVIL CASE NO. 01-6043, IS ON
by Karla Y. Medina-Capili; (2) in the event that the marriage is THE GROUND THAT IT IS BIGAMOUS IN NATURE,
declared null and void, it would exculpate him from the charge of SO ORDERED. DESPITE THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH FINDINGS OR
bigamy; and (3) the pendency of the civil case for the declaration FACTS ON WHICH IT IS BASED IN VIOLATION OF
of nullity of the second marriage serves as a prejudicial question ARTICLE VIII, SECTION 14 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION,
in the instant criminal case. Aggrieved, private respondent filed an appeal before the CA. AND IN CONCLUDING THAT THE SAID DECLARATION OF
NULLITY OF MARRIAGE IS NOT A GROUND FOR
Consequently, the arraignment and pre-trial were reset by the Thus, in a Decision5 dated February 1, 2008, the CA reversed and DISMISSAL OF THE BIGAMY CASE AGAINST THE
RTC of Pasig City, in view of the filing of the Motion to Suspend set aside the RTC’s decision. PETITIONER, WHICH RULING IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE
Proceedings filed by petitioner. The falloreads:cralavvonlinelawlibrary WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE SAID DECISION
AND WHICH IS CONTRARY TO APPLICABLE LAWS AND
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Order dated 07 July 2006 ESTABLISHED JURISPRUDENCE.
In the interim, the RTC of Antipolo City rendered a decision
of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, Branch 152 in Crim. Case
declaring the voidness or incipient invalidity of the second
No. 128370 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is remanded to 3. THE CASE OF TENEBRO V. COURT OF APPEALS SPEAKS
marriage between petitioner and private respondent on the
the trial court for further proceedings. No costs. FOR ITSELF. IT IS AN EXCEPTION TO EXISTING
ground that a subsequent marriage contracted by the husband
JURISPRUDENCE INVOLVING DECLARATION OF NULLITY
during the lifetime of the legal wife is void from the beginning.
SO ORDERED.6nadcralavvonlinelawlibrary OF MARRIAGE AND IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE SET OF
FACTS IN THE SAID CASE, AND THE GROUND FOR
Thereafter, the petitioner accused filed his Manifestation and
DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF MARRIAGE IS
Motion (to Dismiss) praying for the dismissal of the criminal case Petitioner then filed a Motion for Reconsideration against said PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY, HENCE, THERE IS NO
LEGAL BASIS FOR ABANDONING EXISTING private respondent was contracted on December 8, 1999 during not be permitted to judge for themselves its nullity, for the same
JURISPRUDENCE AS WHERE IN THE INSTANT CASE THE the subsistence of a valid first marriage between petitioner and must be submitted to the judgment of competent courts and only
GROUND FOR DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF Karla Y. Medina-Capili contracted on September 3, 1999. Notably, when the nullity of the marriage is so declared can it be held as
MARRIAGE IS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 3 IN RELATION TO the RTC of Antipolo City itself declared the bigamous nature of the void, and so long as there is no such declaration the presumption
ARTICLE 4 OF THE FAMILY CODE. second marriage between petitioner and private respondent. is that the marriage exists. Therefore, he who contracts a second
Thus, the subsequent judicial declaration of the second marriage marriage before the judicial declaration of the first marriage
4. THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT for being bigamous in nature does not bar the prosecution of assumes the risk of being prosecuted for bigamy.12
HOLDING THAT THE USE BY RESPONDENT SHIRLEY G. petitioner for the crime of bigamy.
TISMO OF THE SURNAME “CAPILI” IS ILLEGAL Finally, it is a settled rule that the criminal culpability attaches to
INASMUCH AS THE DECISION OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL Jurisprudence is replete with cases holding that the accused may the offender upon the commission of the offense, and from that
COURT OF ANTIPOLO CITY, BRANCH 72 IN CIVIL CASE still be charged with the crime of bigamy, even if there is a instant, liability appends to him until extinguished as provided by
NO. 01-6043 DECLARING NULL AND VOID THE subsequent declaration of the nullity of the second marriage, so law.13 It is clear then that the crime of bigamy was committed by
MARRIAGE BETWEEN JAMES WALTER P. CAPILI AND long as the first marriage was still subsisting when the second petitioner from the time he contracted the second marriage with
SHIRLEY G. TISMO HAD LONG BECOME FINAL AND marriage was celebrated. private respondent. Thus, the finality of the judicial declaration of
UNAPPEALABLE AS OF THE DATE OF THE SAID nullity of petitioner’s second marriage does not impede the filing
DECISION ON DECEMBER 1, 2004 AND DULY In Jarillo v. People,10 the Court affirmed the accused’s conviction of a criminal charge for bigamy against him.
RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF ENTRIES IN THE for bigamy ruling that the crime of bigamy is consummated on the
CORRESPONDING BOOK IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIVIL celebration of the subsequent marriage without the previous one WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The
REGISTRAR OF PASIG CITY AND THE NATIONAL having been judicially declared null and Decision dated February 1, 2008 and Resolution dated July 24,
STATISTICS OFFICE.8 void, viz.:cralavvonlinelawlibrary 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 30444 are
hereby AFFIRMED.
The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the first
In essence, the issue is whether or not the subsequent declaration marriage was immaterial because prior to the declaration of SO ORDERED.
of nullity of the second marriage is a ground for dismissal of the nullity, the crime had already been consummated. Moreover,
criminal case for bigamy. petitioner’s assertion would only delay the prosecution of bigamy
cases considering that an accused could simply file a petition to
We rule in the negative. declare his previous marriage void and invoke the pendency of
that action as a prejudicial question in the criminal case. We
Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code defines and penalizes the cannot allow that.
crime of bigamy as follows:cralavvonlinelawlibrary
The outcome of the civil case for annulment of petitioner’s
Art. 349. Bigamy. – The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed
marriage to [private complainant] had no bearing upon the
upon any person who shall contract a second or subsequent
determination of petitioner’s innocence or guilt in the criminal
marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved,
case for bigamy, because all that is required for the charge of
or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively
bigamy to prosper is that the first marriage be subsisting at the
dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
time the second marriage is contracted.
proceedings.
Thus, under the law, a marriage, even one which is void or
The elements of the crime of bigamy, therefore, are: (1) the voidable, shall be deemed valid until declared otherwise in a
offender has been legally married; (2) the marriage has not been judicial proceeding. In this case, even if petitioner eventually
legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent obtained a declaration that his first marriage was void ab initio,
spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil the point is, both the first and the second marriage were
Code; (3) that he contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and subsisting before the first marriage was
(4) that the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential annulled.11nadcralavvonlinelawlibrary
requisites for validity.9
In like manner, the Court recently upheld the ruling in the
In the present case, it appears that all the elements of the crime
aforementioned case and ruled that what makes a person
of bigamy were present when the Information was filed on June
criminally liable for bigamy is when he contracts a second or
28, 2004.
subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a valid first
marriage. It further held that the parties to the marriage should
It is undisputed that a second marriage between petitioner and
G.R. No. 191411 July 15, 2013 petitioners.8 Consequently, petitioners filed their respective Aggrieved, petitioners filed their respective Motions for
counter-affidavits.9 Reconsideration18 dated November 9, 2009 and November 6,
RAFAEL L. COSCOLLUELA, Petitioner, 2009, similarly arguing that the SB erred in making a distinction
vs. On March 27, 2003, the assigned Graft Investigation Officer Butch between two time periods, namely: (a) from the filing of the
SANBIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION) and PEOPLE OF THE E. Cañares (Cañares) prepared a Resolution (March 27, 2003 complaint up to the time Cañares prepared the resolution finding
PHILIPPINES, Respondents. Resolution), finding probable cause against petitioners for probable cause against petitioners; and (b) from the submission of
violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. (RA) 3019, otherwise the said resolution to the Acting Ombudsman for review and
x-----------------------x known as the "Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act," and approval up to the filing of the Information with the SB. In this
recommended the filing of the corresponding information. On regard, petitioners averred that the aforementioned periods
G.R. No. 191871
even date, the Information10 was prepared and signed by Cañares should not be compartmentalized and thus, treated as a single
EDWIN N. NACIONALES, ERNESTO P. MALVAS, and JOSE MA. G. and submitted to Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas Primo C. period. Accordingly, the delay of eight (8) years of the instant case
AMUGOD, Petitioners, Miro (Miro) for recommendation. Miro recommended the should be deemed prejudicial to their right to speedy disposition
vs. approval of the Information on June 5, 2003. However, the final of cases.19
SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION) and PEOPLE OF THE approval of Acting Ombudsman Orlando C. Casimiro (Casimiro),
PHILIPPINES, represented by the OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL came only on May 21, 2009, and on June 19, 2009, the The SB, however, denied the foregoing motions in its
PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Respondents. Information was filed before the SB. Resolution20 dated February 10, 2010 for lack of merit.
DECISION Petitioners alleged that they learned about the March 27, 2003 Hence, the instant petitions.
Resolution and Information only when they received a copy of the
PERLAS-BERNABE, J.: latter shortly after its filing with the SB.11 The Issue Before the Court
Assailed in these consolidated Petitions for Certiorari1 are the On July 9, 2009, Coscolluela filed a Motion to Quash,12 arguing, The sole issue raised for the Court’s resolution is whether the SB
October 6, 20092 and February 10, 20103Resolutions of public among others, that his constitutional right to speedy disposition gravely abused its discretion in finding that petitioners’ right to
respondent First Division of Sandiganbayan (SB), denying the of cases was violated as the criminal charges against him were speedy disposition of cases was not violated.
Motion to Quash4 dated July 8, 2009 filed by petitioner Rafael L. resolved only after almost eight (8) years since the complaint was
The Court’s Ruling
Coscolluela (Coscolluela). The said motion was adopted by instituted. Nacionales, Malvas, and Amugod later adopted
petitioners Edwin N. Nacionales (Nacionales), Dr. Ernesto P. Coscolluela’s motion. The petitions are meritorious.
Malvas (Malvas), and Jose Ma. G. Amugod (Amugod), praying for
the dismissal of Crim. Case No. SB-09-CRM-0154 for violation of In reply, the respondents filed their Opposition to Motion to A person’s right to the speedy disposition of his case is
their right to speedy disposition of cases. Quash13 dated August 7, 2009, explaining that although the guaranteed under Section 16, Article III of the 1987 Philippine
Information was originally dated March 27, 2003, it still had to go Constitution (Constitution) which provides:
The Facts through careful review and revision before its final approval. It
also pointed out that petitioners never raised any objections SEC. 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of
Coscolluela served as governor of the Province of Negros regarding the purported delay in the proceedings during the their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative
Occidental (Province) for three (3) full terms which ended on June interim.14 bodies.
30, 2001. During his tenure, Nacionales served as his Special
Projects Division Head, Amugod as Nacionales’ subordinate, and The Ruling of the Sandiganbayan This constitutional right is not limited to the accused in criminal
Malvas as Provincial Health Officer.5 proceedings but extends to all parties in all cases, be it civil or
In a Resolution15 dated October 6, 2009, the SB denied petitioners’ administrative in nature, as well as all proceedings, either judicial
On November 9, 2001, the Office of the Ombudsman for the Motion to Quash for lack of merit. It held that the preliminary or quasi-judicial. In this accord, any party to a case may demand
Visayas (Office of the Ombudsman) received a letter- investigation against petitioners was actually resolved by Cañares expeditious action to all officials who are tasked with the
complaint6 dated November 7, 2001 from People’s Graftwatch, on March 27, 2003, one (1) year and four (4) months from the administration of justice.21
requesting for assistance to investigate the anomalous purchase date the complaint was filed, or in November 9, 2001. Complying
of medical and agricultural equipment for the Province in the with internal procedure, Cañares then prepared the March 27, It must be noted, however, that the right to speedy disposition of
amount of ₱20,000,000.00 which allegedly happened around a 2003 Resolution and Information for the recommendation of the cases should be understood to be a relative or flexible concept
month before Coscolluela stepped down from office. Miro and eventually, the final approval of the Casimiro. As these such that a mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved
issuances had to undergo careful review and revision through the would not be sufficient.22Jurisprudence dictates that the right is
Acting on the letter-complaint, the Case Building Team of the various levels of the said office, the period of delay – i.e., from deemed violated only when the proceedings are attended by
Office of the Ombudsman conducted its investigation, resulting in March 27, 2003 to May 21, 2009, or roughly over six (6) years – vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays; or when unjustified
the issuance of a Final Evaluation Report7 dated April 16, 2002 cannot be deemed as inordinate16 and as such, petitioners’ postponements of the trial are asked for and secured; or even
which upgraded the complaint into a criminal case against constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases was not without cause or justifiable motive, a long period of time is
violated.17 allowed to elapse without the party having his case tried.23
Hence, in the determination of whether the defendant has been To this end, the Court equally denies the SB’s ratiocination that On the other hand, the Office of the Ombudsman failed to present
denied his right to a speedy disposition of a case, the following the delay in proceedings could be excused by the fact that the any plausible, special or even novel reason which could justify the
factors may be considered and balanced: (1) the length of delay; case had to undergo careful review and revision through the four-year delay in terminating its investigation. Its excuse for the
(2) the reasons for the delay; (3) the assertion or failure to assert different levels in the Office of the Ombudsman before it is finally delay — the many layers of review that the case had to undergo
such right by the accused; and (4) the prejudice caused by the approved, in addition to the steady stream of cases which it had and the meticulous scrutiny it had to entail — has lost its novelty
delay.24 to resolve. and is no longer appealing, as was the invocation in the Tatad
case. The incident before us does not involve complicated factual
Examining the incidents in the present case, the Court holds that Verily, the Office of the Ombudsman was created under the and legal issues, specially (sic) in view of the fact that the subject
petitioners’ right to a speedy disposition of their criminal case had mantle of the Constitution, mandated to be the "protector of the computerization contract had been mutually cancelled by the
been violated. people" and as such, required to "act promptly on complaints filed parties thereto even before the Anti-Graft League filed its
in any form or manner against officers and employees of the complaint. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
First, it is observed that the preliminary investigation proceedings Government, or of any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
took a protracted amount of time to complete. thereof, in order to promote efficient service."25 This great Being the respondents in the preliminary investigation
responsibility cannot be simply brushed aside by ineptitude. proceedings, it was not the petitioners’ duty to follow up on the
In this relation, the Court does not lend credence to the SB’s
Precisely, the Office of the Ombudsman has the inherent duty not prosecution of their case. Conversely, it was the Office of the
position that the conduct of preliminary investigation was
only to carefully go through the particulars of case but also to Ombudsman’s responsibility to expedite the same within the
terminated as early as March 27, 2003, or the time when Cañares
resolve the same within the proper length of time. Its dutiful bounds of reasonable timeliness in view of its mandate to
prepared the Resolution recommending the filing of the
performance should not only be gauged by the quality of the promptly act on all complaints lodged before it. As pronounced in
Information. This is belied by Section 4,
assessment but also by the reasonable promptness of its the case of Barker v. Wingo:28
Rule II of the Administrative Order No. 07 dated April 10, 1990, dispensation. Thus, barring any extraordinary complication, such
as the degree of difficulty of the questions involved in the case or A defendant has no duty to bring himself to trial; the State has
otherwise known as the "Rules of Procedure of the Office of the
any event external thereto that effectively stymied its normal that duty as well as the duty of insuring that the trial is consistent
Ombudsman," which provides:
work activity – any of which have not been adequately proven by with due process.
SEC. 4. Procedure – The preliminary investigation of cases falling the prosecution in the case at bar – there appears to be no
Fourth, the Court finally recognizes the prejudice caused to the
under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan and Regional Trial justifiable basis as to why the Office of the Ombudsman could not
petitioners by the lengthy delay in the proceedings against them.
Courts shall be conducted in the manner prescribed in Section 3, have earlier resolved the preliminary investigation proceedings
Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, subject to the following provisions: against the petitioners. Lest it be misunderstood, the right to speedy disposition of cases
is not merely hinged towards the objective of spurring dispatch in
xxxx Third, the Court deems that petitioners cannot be faulted for their
the administration of justice but also to prevent the oppression of
alleged failure to assert their right to speedy disposition of cases.
No information may be filed and no complaint may be dismissed the citizen by holding a criminal prosecution suspended over him
without the written authority or approval of the Ombudsman in Records show that they could not have urged the speedy for an indefinite time. Akin to the right to speedy trial, its "salutary
cases falling within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, or of the resolution of their case because they were unaware that the objective" is to assure that an innocent person may be free from
proper Deputy Ombudsman in all other cases. (Emphasis and investigation against them was still on-going. They were only the anxiety and expense of litigation or, if otherwise, of having his
underscoring supplied) informed of the March 27, 2003 Resolution and Information guilt determined within the shortest possible time compatible
against them only after the lapse of six (6) long years, or when with the presentation and consideration of whatsoever legitimate
The above-cited provision readily reveals that there is no they received a copy of the latter after its filing with the SB on defense he may interpose.30 This looming unrest as well as the
complete resolution of a case under preliminary investigation until June 19, 2009.26 In this regard, they could have reasonably tactical disadvantages carried by the passage of time should be
the Ombudsman approves the investigating officer’s assumed that the proceedings against them have already been weighed against the State and in favor of the individual. In the
recommendation to either file an Information with the SB or to terminated. This serves as a plausible reason as to why petitioners context of the right to a speedy trial, the Court in Corpuz v.
dismiss the complaint. Therefore, in the case at bar, the never followed-up on the case altogether. Instructive on this point Sandiganbayan31 (Corpuz) illumined:
preliminary investigation proceedings against the petitioners were is the Court’s observation in Duterte v. Sandiganbayan,27 to wit:
not terminated upon Cañares’ preparation of the March 27, 2003 A balancing test of applying societal interests and the rights of the
Resolution and Information but rather, only at the time Casimiro Petitioners in this case, however, could not have urged the speedy accused necessarily compels the court to approach speedy trial
finally approved the same for filing with the SB. In this regard, the resolution of their case because they were completely unaware cases on an ad hoc basis.
proceedings were terminated only on May 21, 2009, or almost that the investigation against them was still on-going. Peculiar to
x x x Prejudice should be assessed in the light of the interest of the
eight (8) years after the filing of the complaint. this case, we reiterate, is the fact that petitioners were merely
defendant that the speedy trial was designed to protect, namely:
asked to comment, and not file counter-affidavits which is the
Second, the above-discussed delay in the Ombudsman’s to prevent oppressive pre-trial incarceration; to minimize anxiety
proper procedure to follow in a preliminary investigation. After
resolution of the case largely remains unjustified. and concerns of the accused to trial; and to limit the possibility
giving their explanation and after four long years of being in the
that his defense will be impaired. Of these, the most serious is the
dark, petitioners, naturally, had reason to assume that the charges
last, because the inability of a defendant adequately to prepare
against them had already been dismissed.
his case skews the fairness of the entire system. There is also embracing than the protection under Article VII, Section 15, which liability is really the obligation and moral duty of everyone to
prejudice if the defense witnesses are unable to recall accurately covers only the period after the submission of the case. The repair or make whole the damage caused to another by reason of
the events of the distant past. Even if the accused is not present constitutional provision applies to civil, criminal and his own act or omission, done intentionally or negligently,
imprisoned prior to trial, he is still disadvantaged by restraints on administrative cases. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied; whether or not the same be punishable by law."(Emphasis and
his liberty and by living under a cloud of anxiety, suspicion and citations omitted) underscoring supplied)
often, hostility. His financial resources may be drained, his
association is curtailed, and he is subjected to public obloquy. Thus, in view of the unjustified length of time miring the Office of Based on the violation of petitioners’ right to speedy disposition
the Ombudsman’s resolution of the case as well as the of cases as herein discussed, the present case stands to be
Delay is a two-edge sword. It is the government that bears the concomitant prejudice that the delay in this case has caused, it is dismissed even before either the prosecution or the defense has
burden of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. The passage undeniable that petitioners’ constitutional right to due process been given the chance to present any evidence. Thus, the Court is
of time may make it difficult or impossible for the government to and speedy disposition of cases had been violated. As the unable to make a definite pronouncement as to whether
carry its burden. The Constitution and the Rules do not require institutional vanguard against corruption and bureaucracy, the petitioners indeed committed the acts or omissions from which
impossibilities or extraordinary efforts, diligence or exertion from Office of the Ombudsman should create a system of any civil liability on their part might arise as prescribed under
courts or the prosecutor, nor contemplate that such right shall accountability in order to ensure that cases before it are resolved Section 2, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court.36 Consequently, absent
deprive the State of a reasonable opportunity of fairly prosecuting with reasonable dispatch and to equally expose those who are this pronouncement, the Province is not precluded from
criminals. As held in Williams v. United States, for the government responsible for its delays, as it ought to determine in this case. instituting a subsequent civil case based on the delict if only to
to sustain its right to try the accused despite a delay, it must show recover the amount of ₱20,000,000.00 in public funds attributable
two things: (a) that the accused suffered no serious prejudice Corollarily, for the SB’s patent and utter disregard of the existing to petitioners’ alleged malfeasance.
beyond that which ensued from the ordinary and inevitable delay; laws and jurisprudence surrounding the matter, the Court finds
and (b) that there was no more delay than is reasonably that it gravely abused its discretion when it denied the quashal of WHEREFORE, the petitions are hereby GRANTED. The assailed
attributable to the ordinary processes of justice. the Information. Perforce, the assailed resolutions must be set Resolutions dated October 6, 2009 and February 10, 2010 of the
aside and the criminal case against petitioners be dismissed. First Division of the Sandiganbayan are ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.
Closely related to the length of delay is the reason or justification The Sandiganbayan is likewise ordered to DISMISS Crim. Case No.
of the State for such delay. Different weights should be assigned While the foregoing pronouncement should, as matter of course, SB-09-CRM-0154 for violation of the Constitutional right to speedy
to different reasons or justifications invoked by the State. For result in the acquittal of the petitioners, it does not necessarily disposition of cases of petitioners Rafael L. Coscolluela, Edwin N.
instance, a deliberate attempt to delay the trial in order to follow that petitioners are entirely exculpated from any civil Nacionales, Dr. Ernesto P. Malvas, and Jose Ma. G. Amugod,
hamper or prejudice the defense should be weighted heavily liability, assuming that the same is proven in a subsequent case without prejudice to any civil action which the Province of Negros
against the State. Also, it is improper for the prosecutor to which the Province may opt to pursue. Occidental may file against petitioners.
intentionally delay to gain some tactical advantage over the
Section 2, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court provides that an acquittal SO ORDERED.
defendant or to harass or prejudice him. On the other hand, the
in a criminal case does not bar the private offended party from
heavy case load of the prosecution or a missing witness should be
pursuing a subsequent civil case based on the delict, unless the
weighted less heavily against the State. x x x (Emphasis and
judgment of acquittal explicitly declares that the act or omission
underscoring supplied; citations omitted)
from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.33 As explained
As the right to a speedy disposition of cases encompasses the in the case of Abejuela v. People,34 citing Banal v. Tadeo, Jr.:35
broader purview of the entire proceedings of which trial proper is
The Rules provide: "The extinction of the penal action does not
but a stage, the above-discussed effects in Corpuz should equally
carry with it extinction of the civil, unless the extinction proceeds
apply to the case at bar. As held in Dansal v. Fernandez, Sr.:32
from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the
Sec. 16, Article III of the 1987 Constitution, reads: civil might arise did not exist. In other cases, the person entitled to
the civil action may institute it in the jurisdiction and in the
"Sec. 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of manner provided by law against the person who may be liable for
their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative restitution of the thing and reparation or indemnity for the
bodies." damage suffered."
SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 179031 November 14, 2012 treatment. Her mother was also immediately informed of her offended party the amount of P75,000.00, to pay moral damages
ordeal. Subsequently, "AAA" was taken into the custody of the in the amount of P50,000.00, and the amount of P25,000.00 as
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, Department of Social Welfare and Development. exemplary damages to deter other fathers with perverse
vs. proclivities for aberrant sexual behavior for sexually abusing their
BENJAMIN SORIA y GOMEZ, Accused-Appellant. On March 15, 2000, Medico-Legal Officer Francisco A. Supe, Jr., own daughters.
M.D. (Dr. Supe) examined "AAA", which examination yielded the
DECISION following results: SO ORDERED.10
DEL CASTILLO, J.: GENERAL AND EXTRA-GENITAL: Fairly developed, fairly nourished Ruling of the Court of Appeals
and coherent female child. Breasts are undeveloped. Abdomen is
This case involves a father’s detestable act of abusing his daughter In its Decision11 dated December 29, 2006, the CA found partial
flat and soft.
through rape by sexual assault. merit in the appeal. While the appellate court was convinced that
GENITAL: There is absent growth of pubic hair. Labia majora are appellant raped "AAA", it nevertheless noted the prosecution’s
Factual Antecedents
full, convex, and coaptated with light brown labia minora failure to present her birth certificate as competent proof of her
Accused-appellant Benjamin Soria y Gomez (appellant) seeks a presenting in between. On separating the same, disclosed an minority. Thus, the CA concluded that the crime committed by
review of the December 29, 2006 Decision1 of the Court of elastic, fleshy type, hyperemic and intact hymen. Posterior appellant against his daughter was only simple rape and
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01442 which affirmed with fourchette is sharp. accordingly modified the penalty imposed by the trial court from
modification the June 30, 2005 Judgment2 of the Regional Trial death to reclusion perpetua and reduced the civil indemnity
CONCLUSION: The subject is in virgin state physically. There are no awarded from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00. The dispositive portion
Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 94, in Criminal Case No. Q-01-
external signs of application of any form of physical trauma.6 of the appellate court’s Decision reads as follows:
98692. Said RTC Judgment found appellant guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of rape committed against his Version of the Defense WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is hereby GRANTED
daughter "AAA",3 as described in an Information,4 the relevant
and the June 30, 2005 Decision of the Regional Trial Court of
portion of which reads: Appellant admitted that he was at home on the day and time of
Quezon City, Branch 94, in Criminal Case No. Q-01-98692, is
"AAA’s" alleged rape but denied committing the same. Instead, he
That on or about the 26th day of February, 2000, in Quezon City, hereby MODIFIED, in that, the penalty imposed is reduced to
claimed that the filing of the rape case against him was instigated
Philippines, the said accused, who is the father of private reclusion perpetua instead of death and the civil indemnity to be
by his wife, whom he confronted about her illicit affair with a man
complainant "AAA", did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and paid by the offender to the victim is hereby reduced to the
residing in their community. According to appellant, he could not
feloniously with force and intimidation commit an act of sexual amount of P50,000.00 instead of P75,000.00 pursuant to
have molested "AAA" because he treated her well. In fact, he was
assault upon the person of one "AAA", a minor, 7 years of age[,] prevailing jurisprudence as explained in this decision.
the only one sending his children to school since his wife already
by then and there inserting his penis into [the] genital of said neglected them and seldom comes home. Pursuant to Section 13(c), Rule 124 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal
complainant, all against her will and consent, which act debases,
Procedure as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC dated September
degrades, or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of said Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
28, 2004, which became effective on October 15, 2004, this
"AAA", as a human being, in violation of said law.
On June 30, 2005, the trial court rendered its Judgment7 finding judgment of the Court of Appeals may be appealed to the
CONTRARY TO LAW.5 appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape Supreme Court by notice of appeal filed with the Clerk of Court of
against "AAA", his daughter of minor age, as charged in the the Court of Appeals.
Appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. Pre-trial and Information. It ruled that the lack of tenacious resistance on the
trial thereafter ensued. SO ORDERED.12
part of "AAA" is immaterial considering that appellant’s moral
ascendancy and influence over her substitute for violence and Still insisting on his innocence, appellant comes to this Court
Version of the Prosecution
intimidation.8 It also held that his wife could not have instigated through this appeal.
On February 26, 2000, "AAA" and her siblings enjoyed the the filing of the rape case since as the mother of "AAA", it would
spaghetti their father (appellant) brought home for merienda. not be natural for her to use her child as a tool to exact revenge Assignment of Errors
After eating, "AAA" went to the bedroom to rest. Thereafter, especially if it will result in her embarrassment and stigma.9 The
trial court gave credence to the testimony of "AAA" and her Appellant adopts the same assignment of errors he raised before
appellant also entered the room and positioned himself on top of
positive identification of appellant as her rapist, and rejected the the appellate court, viz:
"AAA", took off her clothes and inserted his penis into her vagina.
"AAA" felt intense pain from her breast down to her vagina and latter’s defense of denial. The dispositive portion of the Judgment
I. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED
thus told her father that it was painful. At that point, appellant reads as follows:
GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF RAPE DESPITE THE FAILURE OF THE
apologized to his daughter, stood up, and left the room. This PROSECUTION TO OVERTHROW THE CONSTITUTIONAL
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered
whole incident was witnessed by "AAA’s" brother, "BBB". PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE X X X.
finding the herein accused, BENJAMIN SORIA Y GOMEZ − GUILTY
The pain persisted until "AAA’s" vagina started to bleed. She thus beyond reasonable doubt of the crime as charged and sentences
told her aunt about it and they proceeded to a hospital for him to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH and to indemnify the
II. ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF THE Thus, rape can now be committed either through sexual Both the trial court and the CA held that "AAA" was a credible
CRIME CHARGED, THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN intercourse or by sexual assault. Rape under paragraph 1 of the witness. They ruled that her testimony deserved credence and is
IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY UPON HIM.13 above-cited article is referred to as rape through sexual sufficient evidence that she was raped by appellant. We find no
intercourse. Carnal knowledge is the central element and it must cogent reason to overturn these findings.
Appellant asserts that he should be acquitted of the crime of rape be proven beyond reasonable doubt.14 It is commonly
since there is no evidence that would establish the fact of sexual denominated as "organ rape" or "penile rape"15and must be It would be highly inconceivable for "AAA" to impute to her own
intercourse. Aside from the prosecution’s failure to prove penile attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in father the crime of raping her unless the imputation is true.19 In
contact, "AAA’s" testimony was also wanting in details as to how subparagraphs (a) to (d) of paragraph 1. fact, it takes "a certain amount of psychological depravity for a
he took off her underwear or whether she saw his penis during young woman to concoct a story which would put her own father
the incident despite leading questions propounded on the matter On the other hand, rape under paragraph 2 of Article 266-A is in jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the
by the prosecution. The medical report even revealed that commonly known as rape by sexual assault. The perpetrator, family including herself to a lifetime of shame"20 unless the
"AAA’s" hymen remained intact and that there were no notable under any of the attendant circumstances mentioned in imputation is true.
lacerations or external physical injuries thereon. Appellant paragraph 1, commits this kind of rape by inserting his penis into
therefore surmises that his wife merely instigated "AAA" to file another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or When a rape victim’s testimony on the manner she was defiled is
this baseless rape case against him in retaliation for his act of object into the genital or anal orifice of another person. It is also "straightforward and candid, and is corroborated by the medical
confronting her about her illicit relationship with a neighbor. called "instrument or object rape", also "gender-free rape".16 findings of the examining physician as in this case, the same is
sufficient to support a conviction for rape."21
Our Ruling The Information did not specify whether
the crime of rape was committed through Appellant is guilty of rape by sexual
The appeal lacks merit. sexual intercourse or by sexual assault.
assault and not through sexual
The crime of rape under Article 266-A of The Information in this case did not specify with certainty whether
the Revised Penal Code (RPC). intercourse.
appellant committed the rape through sexual intercourse under
paragraph 1 of Article 266-A, or rape by sexual assault as The trial court’s conviction of the appellant was for rape through
Republic Act No. 8353, otherwise known as the Anti-Rape Law of
described in paragraph 2 thereof. The Information stated that sexual intercourse under paragraph 1(a) of Article 266-A. The CA
1997, classified the crime of rape as a crime against persons. It
appellant inserted his penis into the genital of "AAA," which sustained the trial court’s finding that appellant had sexual
also amended Article 335 of the RPC and incorporated therein
constituted rape by sexual intercourse under the first paragraph intercourse with "AAA" against her will.
Article 266-A which reads:
of Article 266-A. At the same time, the Information alleged that
Article 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed. – Rape is appellant used force and intimidation to commit an act of sexual In determining whether appellant is indeed guilty of rape through
committed – assault. While these allegations cause ambiguity, they only pertain sexual intercourse under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A, it is
to the mode or manner of how the rape was committed and the essential to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he had carnal
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under same do not invalidate the Information or result in the automatic knowledge of "AAA". There must be proof that his penis touched
any of the following circumstances: dismissal of the case. "[W]here an offense may be committed in the labia of "AAA" or slid into her female organ, and not merely
any of the different modes and the offense is alleged to have been stroked the external surface thereof, to ensure his conviction of
a) Through force, threat or intimidation; committed in two or more modes specified, the indictment is rape by sexual intercourse.22 1ªvvph!1
sufficient, notwithstanding the fact that the different means of
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise We reviewed the testimony of "AAA" and found nothing therein
committing the same offense are prohibited by separate sections
unconscious, that would show that she was raped through sexual intercourse.
of the statute. The allegation in the information of the various
ways of committing the offense should be regarded as a While "AAA" categorically stated that she felt something inserted
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
description of only one offense and the information is not thereby into her vagina, her testimony was sorely lacking in important
authority;
rendered defective on the ground of multifariousness."17 Any details that would convince us with certainty that it was indeed
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is objection from the appellant with respect to the Information is the penis of appellant that was placed into her vagina.
demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned held to have been waived failing any effort to oppose the same
When "AAA" was placed on the witness stand, she narrated that:
above be present; before trial.18 He therefore can be convicted of rape through
sexual intercourse or rape by sexual assault, depending on the Q - The earlier statement which you made when you said that you
2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned evidence adduced during trial. wanted to explain something about your father, is that true?
in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by
inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or The findings of the RTC and the CA on A - Yes, sir.
any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of
another person. the credibility of "AAA" deserve respect Q - So, you said that you wanted to explain something about your
father, what was that?
and great weight.
A - What he did, sir. A - He left the room. her vagina to bleed necessitating her examination at the hospital.
Both the trial court and the CA found "AAA’s" testimony to be
Q - What was that? Q - Before he went away and left? credible. We find no compelling reason not to lend credence to
the same.
A - I was raped, sir. A - It was painful, sir.
This defilement constitutes rape under paragraph 2 of Article 266-
Q - What did he do when you said he raped you? Q - And what was the answer of your father?
A of the RPC, which provides that rape by sexual assault is
A - He laid on top of me, sir.23 A - He said sorry, sir. committed "by any person who, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual
xxxx Q - How long was he or how long were you in that position, you assault by inserting x x x any instrument or object, into the genital
were lying down and your father was on top of you? or anal orifice of another person."
Q - So when you said he laid on top of you, did you feel anything?
Did you feel any pain in any part of your body? A - I do not know, sir.24 Moreover, Dr. Supe corroborated her testimony as follows:
A - Yes, sir. xxxx Q - Doctor, with respect to Exhibit A, the Medico-Legal Report
pertaining to the entry into the genital, which reads: On
Q - In what part of your body did you feel pain? Q - Earlier, you were making reference to your father whom you separating the hymen, disclosed was an elastic, fleshy type,
said abused you. I am asking you now to tell us if your father is hyperemic and intact hymen. Will you please tell us, Doctor, what
A - I felt pain in my breast and my stomach. around? is this hyperemic hymen?
Q - What about your private part? A - Yes, sir. A - Hyperemic hymen, sir, means that at the time of examination,
A - Yes, sir. I found out that it was reddish in color.
Q - Will you please point x x x to him?
Q - Did you know why your stomach as well as your body and your Q - Considering the age of the child or the patient, the victim
A - Yes, sir. (Witness pointing to a man who is wearing yellow t-
private part hurt or become painful? whom you examined at that time who was about 6 years old, will
shirt and maong pants who when asked identified himself as
you be able to tell us, Doctor, what could have caused this kind of
Benjamin Soria.)
A - I don’t know, sir. injury, because this is an injury to the hymen?
Q - Is he the same person who according to you laid on top of you
Q - Did you feel something inserted into your private part? A - Hyperemic, sir, is observed whenever there is friction applied
and inserted something into your vagina or private part?
to an area, such as in the form of scratching.
A - Yes, sir.
A - Yes, sir.25
Q - What about insertion of object, would this result into
Q - What is that, if you know? hyperemic hymen?
It is evident from the testimony of "AAA" that she was unsure
A - The bird of my papa. whether it was indeed appellant’s penis which touched her labia
A - If the object is being rubbed, sir, there is a possibility.
and entered her organ since she was pinned down by the latter’s
Q - Why did you know that? weight, her father having positioned himself on top of her while Q - A finger will produce this kind of injury?
she was lying on her back. "AAA" stated that she only knew that it
A - Because my brother, "BBB", told me. was the "bird" of her father which was inserted into her vagina A - Possible, sir.26
after being told by her brother "BBB". Clearly, "AAA" has no
Q - Why? Was "BBB", your brother, present when your father was According to Dr. Supe, it is possible that "AAA’s" hyperemic
personal knowledge that it was appellant’s penis which touched
on top of you? hymen may be the result of the insertion of a finger or object.
her labia and inserted into her vagina. Hence, it would be
erroneous to conclude that there was penile contact based solely While Dr. Supe said that the injury could also be attributed to
A - Yes, sir.
on the declaration of "AAA’s" brother, "BBB", which declaration scratching, "AAA’s" testimony is bereft of any showing that she
Q - Why do you know that he was there? was hearsay due to "BBB’s" failure to testify. Based on the scratched her genital organ thus causing the reddening. Appellant
foregoing, it was an error on the part of the RTC and the CA to would also want to make it appear that the injury of "AAA" was
A - He told me so, sir. conclude that appellant raped "AAA" through sexual intercourse. the result of friction from playing or riding a bicycle since the
doctor testified that this was also possible. However, there is
Q - Who? Instead, we find appellant guilty of rape by sexual assault. It likewise no evidence that friction was applied on "AAA’s" female
cannot be denied that appellant inserted an object into "AAA’s" organ when she played hide and seek with her playmates or that
A - "BBB". she actually rode a bicycle. On the other hand, "AAA" was
female organ. "AAA" categorically testified that appellant inserted
something into her vagina. She claimed to have suffered categorical in stating that in the afternoon of February 26, 2000,
Q - Okay, when you felt pain as something was inserted [into]
tremendous pain during the insertion. The insertion even caused appellant removed her clothes, laid on top of her, and that she
your private part, what did you say to your father?
felt something being inserted into her vagina and that thereafter give credence to the assertion of appellant that the crime of rape It is settled that "when either one of the qualifying circumstances
she experienced pain in her genitals. The foregoing thus proved was negated by the medical findings of an intact hymen or of relationship and minority is omitted or lacking, that which is
that appellant inserted an object into "AAA’s" vagina against her absence of lacerations in the vagina of "AAA". Hymenal rupture, pleaded in the information and proved by the evidence may be
will and without consent. Simply put, appellant committed the vaginal laceration or genital injury is not indispensable because considered as an aggravating circumstance."40 As such, appellant’s
crime of rape by sexual assault. the same is not an element of the crime of rape.28 "An intact relationship with "AAA" may be considered as an aggravating
hymen does not negate a finding that the victim was circumstance.
The following are the elements of rape by sexual assault: raped."29 Here, the finding of reddish discoloration of the hymen
of "AAA" during her medical examination and the intense pain she In view of these, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal
(1) That the offender commits an act of sexual assault; which ranges from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty
felt in her vagina during and after the sexual assault sufficiently
corroborated her testimony that she was raped. (20) years. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the penalty
(2) That the act of sexual assault is committed by any of the
next lower in degree is prision mayor which ranges from six (6)
following means:
Likewise undeserving of credence is appellant’s contention that years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years. Hence, a penalty of
(a) By inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal his wife merely instigated "AAA" to file the charge of rape against twelve (12) years of prison mayor, as minimum, to twenty (20)
orifice; or him in retaliation for his having confronted her about her illicit years of reclusion temporal, as maximum, is imposed upon
affair with another man. This imputation of ill motive is flimsy appellant.
(b) By inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal considering that it is unnatural for appellant’s wife to stoop so low
orifice of another person; as to subject her own daughter to the hardships and shame Damages
concomitant with a prosecution for rape, just to assuage her hurt
(3) That the act of sexual assault is accomplished under any of the In line with prevailing jurisprudence, the awards of P50,000.00 as
feelings.30 It is also improbable for appellant’s wife to have dared
following circumstances: civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as
encourage their daughter "AAA" to publicly expose the dishonor
exemplary damages are each modified to P30,000.00.41 "AAA" is
of the family unless the rape was indeed committed.31
(a) By using force and intimidation; also entitled to an interest on all the amounts of damages
Penalty awarded at the legal rate of 6% per annum from the date of
(b) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise finality of this judgment until fully paid.42
unconscious; or Under Article 266-B of the RPC, the penalty for rape by sexual
assault is prision mayor. However, the penalty is increased to WHEREFORE, the December 29, 2006 Decision of the Court of
(c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01442 is AFFIRMED with
reclusion temporal "if the rape is committed by any of the 10
authority; or MODIFICATIONS. Accused-appellant Benjamin Soria y Gomez is
aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article".
The Information alleged the qualifying circumstances of found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape by
(d) When the woman is under 12 years of age or demented.27
relationship and minority. It was alleged that appellant is the sexual assault and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of twelve
In the instant case, it was clearly established that appellant father of "AAA". During the pre-trial conference, the parties (12) years of prison mayor, as minimum, to twenty (20) years of
committed an act of sexual assault on "AAA" by inserting an stipulated that "AAA" is the daughter of appellant.32 During trial, reclusion temporal, as maximum. He is also ordered to pay "AAA"
instrument or object into her genital. We find it inconsequential appellant admitted his filial bond with "AAA".33 "Admission in the amounts of P30,000.00 as civil indemnity, P30,000.00 as moral
that "AAA" could not specifically identify the particular instrument open court of relationship has been held to be sufficient and, damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages. "AAA" is
or object that was inserted into her genital. What is important and hence, conclusive to prove relationship with the victim."34 entitled to an interest on all damages awarded at the legal rate of
relevant is that indeed something was inserted into her vagina. To 6% per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until fully
require "AAA" to identify the instrument or object that was With respect to minority, however, the Information described paid.
inserted into her vagina would be contrary to the fundamental "AAA" as a 7-year old daughter of appellant. While this also
became the subject of stipulation during the pre-trial conference, SO ORDERED.
tenets of due process. It would be akin to requiring "AAA" to
establish something that is not even required by law. Moreover, it same is insufficient evidence of "AAA’s" age. Her minority must be
might create problems later on in the application of the law if the "proved conclusively and indubitably as the crime itself".35 "There
victim is blind or otherwise unconscious. Moreover, the must be independent evidence proving the age of the victim,
prosecution satisfactorily established that appellant accomplished other than the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the
the act of sexual assault through his moral ascendancy and absence of denial by the accused."36 Documents such as her
influence over "AAA" which substituted for violence and original or duly certified birth certificate, baptismal certificate or
intimidation. Thus, there is no doubt that appellant raped "AAA" school records would suffice as competent evidence of her
by sexual assault. age.37 Here, there was nothing on record to prove the minority of
"AAA" other than her testimony, appellant’s absence of denial,
Appellant’s contentions are untenable. and their pre-trial stipulation.38 The prosecution also failed to
establish that the documents referred to above were lost,
The failure of "AAA" to mention that her panty was removed prior destroyed, unavailable or otherwise totally absent.39
to the rape does not preclude sexual assault. We cannot likewise
G.R. No. 163753 January 15, 2014 physical injuries. On April 17, 1997, the information3 was filed in On appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC,7 sustaining the award of
the Municipal Trial Court in Cities of Oroquieta City (MTCC), to moral damages. It opined that even if the petitioner had been
DR. ENCARNACION C. LUMANTAS, M.D., Petitioner, which the latter pleaded not guilty on May 22, 1998.4 Under the acquitted of the crime charged, the acquittal did not necessarily
vs. order of April 30, 1999, the case was transferred to the RTC mean that he had not incurred civil liability considering that the
HANZ CALAPIZ, REPRESENTED BY HIS PARENTS, HILARIO pursuant to Supreme Court Circular No. 11-99.5 Prosecution had preponderantly established the sufferings of
CALAPIZ, JR. and HERLITA CALAPIZ,Respondent. Hanz as the result of the circumcision.
At the trial, the Prosecution presented several witnesses,
DECISION including Dr. Rufino Agudera as an expert witness and as the The petitioner moved for reconsideration, but the CA denied the
physician who had operated on Hanz twice to repair the damaged motion on April 28, 2004.8
BERSAMIN, J.:
urethra. Dr. Agudera testified that Hanz had been diagnosed to
have urethral stricture and cavernosal injury left secondary to Hence, this appeal.
The acquittal of the accused does not necessarily mean his
absolution from civil liability. trauma that had necessitated the conduct of two operations to
Issue
strengthen and to lengthen the urethra. Although satisfactorily
The Case explaining that the injury to the urethra had been caused by Whether the CA erred in affirming the petitioner’s civil liability
trauma, Dr. Agudera could not determine the kind of trauma that despite his acquittal of the crime of reckless imprudence resulting
In this appeal, an accused desires the reversal of the decision had caused the injury. in serious physical injuries.
promulgated on February 20, 2003,1 whereby the Court of
Appeals (CA) affirmed the judgment rendered on August 6, 1999 In his defense, the petitioner denied the charge. He contended Ruling
by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 13, in Oroquieta City that at the time of his examination of Hanz on January 16, 1995,
ordering him to pay moral damages despite his acquittal of the he had found an accumulation of pus at the vicinity of the The petition for review lacks merit.
crime of reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries appendix two to three inches from the penis that had required
charged against him.2 immediate surgical operation; that after performing the It is axiomatic that every person criminally liable for a felony is
appendectomy, he had circumcised Hanz with his parents’ also civilly liable.9 Nevertheless, the acquittal of an accused of the
Antecedents consent by using a congo instrument, thereby debunking the crime charged does not necessarily extinguish his civil liability. In
parents’ claim that their child had been cauterized; that he had Manantan v. Court of Appeals,10the Court elucidates on the two
On January 16, 1995, Spouses Hilario Calapiz, Jr. and Herlita kinds of acquittal recognized by our law as well as on the different
then cleared Hanz on January 27, 1995 once his fever had
Calapiz brought their 8-year-old son, Hanz Calapiz (Hanz), to the effects of acquittal on the civil liability of the accused, viz:
subsided; that he had found no complications when Hanz
Misamis Occidental Provincial Hospital, Oroquieta City, for an
returned for his follow up check-up on February 2, 1995; and that
emergency appendectomy. Hanz was attended to by the Our law recognizes two kinds of acquittal, with different effects
the abscess formation between the base and the shaft of the
petitioner, who suggested to the parents that Hanz also undergo on the civil liability of the accused.1âwphi1 First is an acquittal on
penis had been brought about by Hanz’s burst appendicitis.
circumcision at no added cost to spare him the pain. With the the ground that the accused is not the author of the act or
parents’ consent, the petitioner performed the coronal type of Ruling of the RTC omission complained of. This instance closes the door to civil
circumcision on Hanz after his appendectomy. On the following liability, for a person who has been found to be not the
day, Hanz complained of pain in his penis, which exhibited In its decision rendered on August 6, 1999,6 the RTC acquitted the perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can never be held
blisters. His testicles were swollen. The parents noticed that the petitioner of the crime charged for insufficiency of the evidence. It liable for such act or omission. There being no delict, civil liability
child urinated abnormally after the petitioner forcibly removed held that the Prosecution’s evidence did not show the required ex delicto is out of the question, and the civil action, if any, which
the catheter, but the petitioner dismissed the abnormality as standard of care to be observed by other members of the medical may be instituted must be based on grounds other than the delict
normal. On January 30, 1995, Hanz was discharged from the profession under similar circumstances. Nonetheless, the RTC complained of. This is the situation contemplated in Rule 111 of
hospital over his parents’ protestations, and was directed to ruled that the petitioner was liable for moral damages because the Rules of Court. The second instance is an acquittal based on
continue taking antibiotics. there was a preponderance of evidence showing that Hanz had reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused. In this case, even if
received the injurious trauma from his circumcision by the the guilt of the accused has not been satisfactorily established, he
On February 8, 1995, Hanz was confined in a hospital because of petitioner. The decision disposed as follows: is not exempt from civil liability which may be proved by
the abscess formation between the base and the shaft of his preponderance of evidence only.
penis. Presuming that the ulceration was brought about by Hanz’s WHEREFORE, for insufficiency of evidence, this court renders
appendicitis, the petitioner referred him to Dr. Henry Go, an judgment acquitting the accused, Dr. Encarnacion Lumantas, of The Rules of Court requires that in case of an acquittal, the
urologist, who diagnosed the boy to have a damaged urethra. reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries, but judgment shall state "whether the evidence of the prosecution
Thus, Hanz underwent cystostomy, and thereafter was operated ordering him to pay Hanz Calapiz ₱50,000.00 as moral damages. absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed
on three times to repair his damaged urethra. No costs. to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In either case, the
judgment shall determine if the act or omission from which the
When his damaged urethra could not be fully repaired and SO ORDERED. civil liability might arise did not exist."11
reconstructed, Hanz’s parents brought a criminal charge against
the petitioner for reckless imprudence resulting to serious Ruling of the CA
Conformably with the foregoing, therefore, the acquittal of an the adjustment in the permissible manner by prescribing legal
accused does not prevent a judgment from still being rendered interest on the award, his sufferings would be unduly
against him on the civil aspect of the criminal case unless the compounded. For that purpose, the reckoning of interest should
court finds and declares that the fact from which the civil liability be from the filing of the criminal information on April 17, 1997,
might arise did not exist. the making of the judicial demand for the liability of the
petitioner.
Although it found the Prosecution’s evidence insufficient to
sustain a judgment of conviction against the petitioner for the WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on
crime charged, the RTC did not err in determining and adjudging February 20, 2003, with the modification that legal interest of 6%
his civil liability for the same act complained of based on mere per annum to start from April 17, 1997 is imposed on the award
preponderance of evidence.12 In this connection, the Court of:₱50,000.00 as moral damages; and ORDERS the petitioner to
reminds that the acquittal for insufficiency of the evidence did not pay the costs of suit.
require that the complainant’s recovery of civil liability should be
through the institution of a separate civil action for that SO ORDERED.
purpose.13
Many years have gone by since Hanz suffered the injury. Interest
of 6% per annum should then be imposed on the award as a
sincere means of adjusting the value of the award to a level that is
not only reasonable but just and commensurate. Unless we make
G.R. No. 208587, July 29, 2015 After staging the walk-out, respondents, on even date, executed a After due proceedings, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Baguio
Board Resolution certifying that in the stockholders meeting, the City, by Joint Resolution of February 2, 2009, recommended the
JM DOMINGUEZ AGRONOMIC COMPANY, INC., HELEN D. following were elected directors and officers of filing of informations as follows:12cralawlawlibrary
DAGDAGAN, PATRICK PACIS, KENNETH PACIS, AND SHIRLEY JMD:5cralawlawlibrary
DOMINGUEZ, Petitioners, v. CECILIA LICLICAN, NORMA D. ISIP, WHEREFORE, premises considered, the undersigned recommends
AND PURITA DOMINGUEZ, Respondents. Board of Directors: for approval the attached Informations for Qualified Theft against
1. Cecilia D. Liclican – Chairman and Presiding Officer LICLICAN and ISIP in I.S. No. 3011 and another against LICLICAN in
DECISION 2. Norma D. Isip I.S. No. 3118.
3. Purita C. Dominguez chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
VELASCO JR., J.:
4. Tessie C. Dominguez, and
5. Shirley C. Dominguez When filed, the informations were eventually raffled to Branch 7
Nature of the Case
of the RTC, the same court overseeing the JDR,13 presided over by
Officers: Judge Mona Lisa V. Tiongson-Tabora (JudgeTiongson-Tabora). The
Petitioners, through the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari 1. Cecilia D. Liclican as President and Presiding Officer criminal cases for qualified theft were then docketed as Criminal
under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, seek the reversal of the Court 2. Norma D. Isip as Vice-President Case Nos. 29176-R (based on I.S. No. 3118) and 29175-R (based on
of Appeals (CA) Decision1dated August 30, 2012 and its 3. Gerald B. Cabrera as Corporate Secretary/Treasurer and I.S. No. 3111).
Resolution2dated July 15, 2013 in CA-G.R. SP No.108617. Said 4. Oscar Aquino – Financial Consultant Auditor
rulings nullified the Orders authorizing the issuance of the assailed chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary On March 10, 2009, Judge Tiongson-Tabora issued an Order14 in
warrants of arrest against respondents for allegedly having been Criminal Case No. 29176-R, finding probable cause for the
issued in grave abuse of discretion. In reaction to the foregoing developments, petitioners Dagdagan, issuance of a warrant of arrest against Liclican, thus:
Patrick and Kenneth Pacis, and Dominguez filed a Complaint chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
The Facts against respondents before the Regional Trial Court of Baguio City
(RTC) for nullification of meetings, election and acts of directors WHEREFORE, the Information filed herein is hereby given due
and officers, injunction and other reliefs, raffled to Branch 59 of course. Let the corresponding warrant of arrest be issued against
During the annual stockholders meeting of petitioner JM the court. Docketed as Civil Case No. 6623-R, the case, after a the accused. As recommended, the bail is hereby fixed as Php
Dominguez Agronomic Company, Inc. (JMD) held on December failed mediation, was referred for appropriate Judicial Dispute 80,000.00.
29, 2007 at the Baguio City Country Club, the election for its new Resolution (JDR) to Branch 7 of the RTC. Meanwhile, petitioner
set of directors was conducted. This event was presided by then stockholders immediately took hold of corporate properties, SO ORDERED.
company president, and herein respondent, Cecilia Liclican represented themselves to JMD’s tenants as the true and lawful chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(Liclican), and attended by her co-respondents Norma Isip (Isip) directors of the company, and collected and deposited rents due
and Purita Rodriguez, and by petitioners Helen Dagdagan A similar Order,15 also dated March 10, 2009,was issued in
the company to its bank account.6ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
(Dagdagan), Patrick Pacis, Kenneth Pacis, and Shirley Dominguez Criminal Case No. 29175-R likewise finding probable cause against
(Dominguez) as well. Conflict ensued when petitioners Patrick and respondents Liclican and Isip, viz:
Subsequently, JMD, represented by petitioners Dagdagan and
Kenneth Pacis were allegedly not allowed to vote on the ground chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Patrick Pacis, executed an Affidavit-Complaint7 dated December
that they are not registered stockholders of JMD. As pointed out, 15, 2008 charging respondents Liclican and Isip with qualified WHEREFORE, the Information filed herein is hereby given due
it was their mother and grandmother, both deceased, who are the theft. Petitioners alleged in the complaint, docketed as I.S. No. course. Let the corresponding warrant of arrest be issued against
stockholders in JMD, and that there is still no settlement of their 3011 with the Office of the City Prosecutor in Baguio City, that on the accused. As recommended, the bail is hereby fixed at Php
respective estates to effectively transfer their shares in the January 2, 2008, Liclican and Isip, without any authority 80,000.00 each.
company to Patrick and Kenneth whatsoever, conspired to withdraw the amount of P852,024.19
Pacis.3ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary from the corporation’s savings account with the Equitable-PCI Considering that the address provided for accused Norma Isip is
Bank; and that the following day, they issued Check No. Washington, U.S.A., the private complainants are hereby given
Tensions rose and respondents, allegedly, walked out of the C00024899018in the amount of P200,000, payable to cash, and to fifteen (15) days from receipt hereof to provide the Court with a
meeting. But since the remaining stockholders with outstanding be drawn against JMD’s account with Robinson’s Savings local address for the said accused if she may be found in the
shares constituted a quorum, the election of officers still Bank.9ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary Philippines.
proceeded, which yielded the following result:4cralawlawlibrary
In a separate complaint,10docketed as I.S. No. 3118, the SO ORDERED.
Officers:
corporation claimed that respondents Liclican and Isip likewise chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. Helen D. Dagdagan as President
issued Equitable-PCI Bank Check No. 32095311payable to one Atty.
2. Patrick D. Pacis as Vice-President
Francisco Lava, Jr. for P200,000 to be debited from the Consequently, the corresponding warrants were issued for the
3. Kenneth D. Pacis as Secretary
corporation’s account. arrests of Isip and Liclican.16ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
4. Shirley C. Dominguez as Treasurer
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
In due time, respondents lodged a petition for certiorari with the Aggrieved, individual petitioners moved for reconsideration, on Tabora acted with grave abuse of discretion when she ordered the
CA, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No.108617, to annul and set aside the the main contention that their election as officers and directors of arrests of respondents Isip and Liclican despite the existence of a
two (2) March 10, 2009 Orders by the RTC Branch 7, anchored, JMD has already been sustained by the trial court via its Judgment prejudicial question.
among others, on the alleged existence of a prejudicial question. in Civil Case No. 6623-R dated May 6, 2011. They likewise claimed
According to respondents, petitioner stockholders, by filing the that the issue on whether or not the RTC, Branch 7 committed As jurisprudence elucidates, a prejudicial question generally exists
complaint-affidavit, are already assuming that they are the grave abuse of discretion is already rendered moot and academic in a situation where a civil action and a criminal action are both
legitimate directors of JMD, which is the very issue in the intra- by the judge’s inhibition in Criminal Case Nos. 29175-R and 29176- pending, and there exists in the former an issue that must be pre-
corporate dispute pending in the RTC, Branch 59. R, and the termination of the JDR proceedings in Civil Case No. emptively resolved before the latter may proceed, because
6623-R. Petitioners’ motion, however, proved futile as the howsoever the issue raised in the civil action is resolved would be
Ruling of the Court of Appeals appellate court denied the same in its January 13, 2013 determinative juris et de jure of the guilt or innocence of the
Resolution.22ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary accused in the criminal case.24The rationale behind the principle is
to avoid two conflicting decisions,25and its existence rests on the
In its assailed Decision, the CA granted the petition for certiorari,
Hence, the instant recourse. concurrence of two essential elements: (i) the civil action involves
disposing as follows:
an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary The Issues criminal action; and (ii) the resolution of such issue determines
WHEREFORE, the challenged Orders both dated March 10, 2009 whether or not the criminal action may
are hereby ANNULLEDand SET ASIDE for having been issued with proceed.26ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Plainly, the resolution of the extant case depends on whether or
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of not there exists a prejudicial question that could affect the
jurisdiction. Here, the CA aptly observed that Civil Case No. 6623-R, the intra-
criminal proceedings for qualified theft against respondents. In
corporate dispute, posed a prejudicial question to Criminal Case
the concrete, the issues are (i) whether or not Civil Case No. 6623-
SO ORDERED. Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R. To be sure, Civil Case No. 6623-R
R constituted a prejudicial question warranting the suspension of
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary involves the same parties herein, and is for nullification of JMD’s
the proceedings in Criminal Case Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R; and
meetings, election and acts of its directors and officers, among
(ii) whether or not grave abuse of discretion attended the
The appellate court held that Judge Tiongson-Tabora should have others. Court intervention was sought to ascertain who between
issuance of the two assailed March 10, 2009 Orders in Criminal
refrained from determining probable cause since she is well aware the two contesting group of officers should rightfully be seated at
Case Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R.
of the pendency of the issue on the validity of JMD’s elections in the company’s helm. Without Civil Case No. 6623-R’s resolution,
Civil Case No. 6623-R. As the judge overseeing the JDR of the said The Court’s Ruling petitioners’ authority to commence and prosecute Criminal Case
intra-corporate dispute, she knew that there was still doubt as to Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R against respondents for qualified theft
who the rightfully elected directors of JMD are and, corollarily, in JMD’s behalf remained questionable, warranting the
who would have the authority to initiate the criminal proceedings The petition lacks merit. suspension of the criminal proceedings.
for qualified theft.17ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
The challenged Orders of the trial court were issued in grave Judge Tiongson-Taboracannot deny knowledge of the pendency of
The CA further noted that even as corporate officers, as they abuse of discretion Civil Case No. 6623-R as the judge presiding over its JDR. As
claim to be, petitioners Dagdagan and Patrick Pacis cannot file the correctly held by the CA:
Complaint- Affidavit in the exercise of corporate powers without We have previously ruled that grave abuse of discretion may arise chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
authority from the board of directors under Sec. 23,18 in relation when a lower court or tribunal violates or contravenes the
to Sec. 2519of the Corporation Code.20 Any doubt cast on the Constitution, the law or existing jurisprudence. By grave abuse of Judge Tiongson-Tabora is well-aware of the existence of said
validity of the board elections would then necessarily extend to discretion is meant, such capricious and whimsical exercise of prejudicial questionthat should have barred the filing of the
the authority of the officers to act. judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. The abuse of criminal complaint against petitioners Liclican and Isip, for the
discretion must be grave as where the power is exercised in an simple reason that a juridical person can only act through its
As further held by the CA: arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal officers, and the issue in the main case submitted for JDR before
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary hostility and must be so patent and gross as to amount to an Judge Tiongson-Tabora is one for nullification of meetings,
evasion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty election and act of directors and officers, injunction and other
x x x Since there is doubt in the instant case as to the sufficiency of enjoined by or to act at all in contemplation of law. The word reliefs. Thus, she knows for a fact that there is a question as to
the authority of a corporate officer, Judge Tiongson-Tabora should “capricious,” usually used in tandem with the term “arbitrary,” who are the legitimate directors of JMD such that there is doubt
have exercised prudence by holding the criminal cases in conveys the notion of willful and unreasoning action. Thus, when as to whether private respondents are in a position to act for
abeyance pending resolution of the intra-corporate dispute which seeking the corrective hand of certiorari, a clear showing of JMD. (emphasis added)
private respondents themselves instituted.21 caprice and arbitrariness in the exercise of discretion is chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary imperative.23ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Verily, the RTC ought to have suspended the proceedings, instead
of issuing the challenged Orders issued by the RTC.
In the case at bar, the CA correctly ruled that Judge Tiongson-
the grave abuse of discretion already committed. The fact remains
The subsequent resolution of the prejudicial question did not that when the RTC, Branch 7 issued its challenged Orders on
cure the defect March 10, 2009, the Judgment in favor of petitioners was not yet
rendered. Consequently, there was still, at that time, a real
It may be, as the petitioners pointed out in their motion for dispute as to who the rightful set of officers were. Plainly, Judge
reconsideration filed before the CA, that Civil Case No. 6623-R was Tiongson-Tabora should not have issued the challenged Orders
eventually resolved in their favor through a Judgment27 dated May and should have, instead, suspended the proceedings until Civil
6, 2011 rendered by the RTC, Branch 59, the dispositive portion of Case No. 6623-R was resolved with finality.
which reads:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary To grant the instant petition and rule that the procedural infirmity
has subsequently been cured either by the Judgment or by Judge
WHEREFORE, from all the foregoing disquisitions, the Court Tiongson-Tabora’s inhibition would mean condoning the
hereby declares that the plaintiffs [petitioners herein] are the continuation of the criminal proceedings despite, at that time, the
duly elected board of directors and officers of the JM Dominguez existence of a prejudicial question. Such condonation would
Agronomic Company, Inc. for the year 2008 and hold-over create a precedent that renders inutile the doctrine on prejudicial
capacity unless here had already been an election of new question, such that the court trying the criminal case will be
officers. permitted to proceed with the trial in the aberrant assumption
that the resolution of the prior instituted civil case would benefit
Consequently, all Corporate Acts which the defendants [herein the private complainant in the criminal proceedings. To reiterate,
respondents and one Gerald Cabrera and one Oscar Aquino] have there was no certainty yet on how the RTC, Branch 59 would rule;
done and performed and thus, no assumption on Civil Case No. 6623-R’s resolution can be
all documents they have executed and issued have no force and made when the challenged Orders were issued. Indeed, had the
effect. RTC, Branch 59 not given credence to petitioners’ arguments,it
would have led to an awkward situation wherein much time and
Considering that the amount of Php850,000.00 which defendants effort is wasted by the RTC, Branch 7 in trying criminal cases it
have withdrawn under the account of JM Dominguez Agronomic should not have entertained.
Company, Inc. from the Equitable – PCI Bank (now Banco de Oro)
is the same subject in CC no. 29175-R entitled Pp. vs. Cecilia The foregoing notwithstanding, it should be made clear that the
Liclican and Norma D. Isip for Qualified Theft, the Court will no nullification of the March 10, 2009 Orders does not, under the
longer dwell on the same. premises, entail the dismissal of the instituted criminal cases, but
would merely result in the suspension of the proceedings in view
xxxx of the prejudicial question. However, given the resolution of the
prejudicial question and Judge Tiongson-Tabora’s inhibition,
SO ORDERED. (emphasis and words in bracket added) Criminal Case Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R may already proceed,
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary and ought to be re-raffled to re-determine the existence of
probable cause for the issuance of warrants of arrest against
This Judgment has, on June 6, 2011,become final and executory,
respondents.
as per the Notice of Entry of Judgment issued by the same trial
court.28 Evidently, whatever cloud of doubt loomed over
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is
petitioners’ actuations has already been dispelled. Petitioners
hereby DENIED for lack of merit. The Court of Appeals’ August 30,
then postulate that the question on whether or not the
2012 Decision and January 13, 2014 Resolution in CA-G.R. SP No.
challenged Orders were issued in grave abuse of discretion has
108617 are hereby AFFIRMED.
already been rendered moot and academic by the June 6, 2011
ruling and by Judge Tiongson-Tabora’s subsequent inhibition in
Criminal Case Nos. 29175-R and 29176-R are
the criminal proceedings. Consequently, they argue that their
hereby REMANDED to the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial
motion for reconsideration should have been granted by the
Court of Baguio City to be re-raffled to one of its branches other
appellate court.
than Branch 7.
We are not convinced.
SO ORDERED.cralawlawlibrary
The resolution of the prejudicial question did not, in context, cure