Case Digest (G.R. No. 139292)
Facts:
Josephine Domagsang v. The Honorable Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 139292, December 05, 2000, Supreme Court Third Division, Vitug, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Josephine Domagsang obtained a loan of P573,800.00 from Ignacio H. Garcia, Jr., an Assistant Vice‑President of Metrobank, and issued 18 postdated checks to secure repayment. When the checks were presented, the drawee bank dishonored them with the notation "ACCOUNT CLOSED." Garcia allegedly telephoned petitioner to demand payment and later his counsel purportedly sent a written demand which, according to prosecution witnesses, petitioner ignored.
On May 8, 1992 Criminal Case No. 92‑4465 (and subsequently Criminal Cases No. 92‑4466 to No. 92‑4482) was filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati, Branch 63, charging petitioner with violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (Anti‑Bouncing Check Law) for each dishonored check. The cases were consolidated; petitioner pled not guilty on November 2, 1992. On September 7, 1993 she filed a demurrer to the evidence (arguing absence of a demand letter and that the checks were collateral), which the RTC denied. Petitioner later waived her right to present evidence (hearing of February 17, 1994), and the RTC convicted her on eighteen counts, sentenced her to one year imprisonment per count, and ordered payment to the private complainant (the trial court’s monetary figure is reported as P573,800.00).
The Court of Appeals, in CA‑G.R. CR No. 18497, affirmed the RTC decision in full (decision dated February 15, 1999; reconsideration denied July 9, 1999). The appellate court based conviction partly on oral demands and the prosecution’s testimony about a written demand. Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court, challenging (inter alia) whether an oral demand suffices under BP Bl...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is an alleged verbal/oral demand to pay sufficient to establish the requisite notice under B.P. Blg. 22 and sustain petitioner’s conviction for issuing dishonored checks?
- Did the Court of Appeals commit reversible error by holding that a written notice of dishonor is not necessary, in light of Lao v. Court of Appeals?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in giving weight to an alleged written demand when the prosecution failed t...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)