Case Digest (G.R. No. 111244)
Facts:
The case involves petitioner Arturo Alano and respondents The Honorable Court of Appeals, Hon. Enrico A. Lanzanas, and Roberto Carlos. The events leading to this case began on June 10, 1986, in the City of Manila, Philippines, when Alano allegedly defrauded Roberto Carlos by selling a parcel of land, which he had previously sold to Carlos, to another individual, Erlinda B. Dandoy. The land in question, located in Bicutan, Taguig, Metro Manila, was covered by Tax Declaration No. 120-004-00398. The information filed against Alano in Criminal Case No. 90-84933 accused him of estafa, claiming that he sold the same property twice, first to Carlos for P30,000.00 and then to Dandoy for P87,900.00, thereby depriving Carlos of his rightful ownership.
In response to the criminal charges, Alano filed a motion to suspend the proceedings, arguing that there was a prejudicial question pending in a separate civil case, Civil Case No. 55103, which was filed by Carlos and his wife against A...
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)