Case Digest (G.R. No. 228334)
Facts:
Eriberto S. Masangkay v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 164443, April 25, 2011, Supreme Court First Division, Corona, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Eriberto S. Masangkay was one of the incorporators and directors of Megatel Factors, Inc. (MFI). On December 29, 1993 he filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a verified Petition for Involuntary Dissolution of MFI under Section 105 of the Corporation Code (docketed as SEC Case No. 12-93-4650), alleging among other things that a Board meeting purportedly held December 5, 1992 and a consequent "Deed of Exchange with Cancellation of Usufruct" were fictitious and simulated and that a minor, Gilberto Ricaros Masangkay, was defrauded and did not receive consideration (shares) for his land.
Respondent-director Cesar Masangkay (a named respondent in the SEC petition) filed a complaint for perjury against Eriberto before the Provincial Prosecutor of Rizal, asserting that Eriberto lied in his verified SEC petition when he denied the December 5, 1992 meeting and described the Deed of Exchange as fictitious. The assistant provincial prosecutor dismissed the complaint on grounds of primary jurisdiction and prejudicial question, but the Chief State Prosecutor of the Department of Justice reinstated it, ruled that perjury was not within SEC jurisdiction, and ordered preliminary investigation, which led to an information (amended to state December 1992) charging Eriberto with perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code. The criminal case was docketed as Criminal Case No. 56495 and tried in Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) Mandaluyong City, Branch 59.
Eriberto moved to quash, reiterating primary-jurisdiction and prejudicial-question defenses; the MeTC denied the motion. He filed certiorari petitions in the RTC (Branch 158, Pasig City), which denied relief, and to the Court of Appeals (dismissed as wrong mode of appeal). During trial Eriberto pleaded not guilty, waived pretrial, and the prosecution presented private complainant Cesar as its sole witness and the minutes of the alleged December 5, 1992 meeting and the Deed of Exchange (bearing Eriberto's signature), plus evidence of guardianship-court approval. The defense presented Elizabeth (MFI corporate secretary) who could not recall sending notice for the December 5, 1992 meeting and testified that MFI never issued stock certificates to the minor; Eriberto testified he signed the minutes only after they were brought to his house and that no meeting actually took place.
On October 18, 2000 the MeTC convicted Eriberto of perjury, finding the prosecution proved that the meeting took place and that Eriberto knowingly made false statements; he was sentenced to arresto mayor to prision correccional. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong, Branch 213, affirmed the MeTC judgment. The Court of Appeals (CA) likewise affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to imprisonment for six months and one day of prision correccional minimum (CA Decision of March 16, 2004; Resolution July 9, 2004). Eriberto's motion for reconsideration in the CA was denied.
Eriberto filed a Petition for Review under Rule 45 with the Supreme Court challenging whether (1) there...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Whether the prosecution proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that petitioner made a deliberate assertion of falsehood.
- Whether the statements alleged to be false were material to the petition for involuntary dissolution.
- Whether the perjury prosecution could proceed while the SEC dissolution pet...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)