Title
Alano vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 111244
Decision Date
Dec 15, 1997
Arturo Alano charged with estafa for double-selling land; civil case filed for annulment. Criminal case proceeds as Alano admitted signature validity, waiving forgery defense.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 111244)

Facts:

Background of the Case:

  • Petitioner Arturo Alano was charged with estafa in Criminal Case No. 90-84933 for allegedly defrauding Roberto S. Carlos by selling the same parcel of land twice. The first sale was to Roberto Carlos for P30,000, and the second sale was to Erlinda B. Dandoy for P87,900.

Civil Case Filed Earlier:

  • A civil case (Civil Case No. 55103) was filed by Roberto Carlos and Trinidad M. Carlos against Arturo Alano on March 1, 1985, seeking the annulment of the second sale and recovery of possession and damages. In this civil case, Alano claimed that his signature on the first deed of sale to Carlos was forged, rendering the sale fictitious.

Motion for Suspension of Criminal Case:

  • Alano moved to suspend the criminal case for estafa, arguing that the resolution of the civil case (which involved the validity of the first sale) was a prejudicial question that needed to be resolved first. The trial court denied his motion and subsequent motion for reconsideration.

Court of Appeals Decision:

  • The Court of Appeals dismissed Alano's petition for certiorari and prohibition, affirming the trial court's denial of the motion to suspend the criminal case. The appellate court noted that during the pre-trial of the criminal case, Alano had admitted the validity of his signature in the first deed of sale and acknowledged payments made by Carlos.

Issue:

  • Whether the pendency of Civil Case No. 55103 constitutes a prejudicial question that justifies the suspension of the criminal case for estafa against Arturo Alano.

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, ruling that the criminal case for estafa should not be suspended. The Court held that Alano's admission of the validity of his signature in the first deed of sale during the pre-trial of the criminal case amounted to a waiver of his defense of forgery in the civil case. Consequently, the issue of forgery was no longer a prejudicial question that needed to be resolved before proceeding with the criminal case.

Ratio:

  • (Unlock)

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.