Case Digest (G.R. No. 232678)
Facts:
Esteban Donato Reyes v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 232678, July 03, 2019, Supreme Court Third Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Esteban Donato Reyes was criminally charged by information dated June 5, 2006 (filed September 26, 2006) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 89, Quezon City, originally designated as an offense under Section 5(e), paragraph 2 of R.A. No. 9262 but later held by the RTC to allege violation of Section 5(i). A Temporary Protection Order (TPO) was issued on March 12, 2007 directing Reyes to resume monthly financial support of P20,000, and a Hold Departure Order (HDO) was issued on August 30, 2007; the TPO was made permanent by order dated October 28, 2008.
Reyes moved to quash the information (filed June 11, 2009) arguing that “abandoning without financial support” is not criminalized by R.A. No. 9262; the Office of the Prosecutor opposed. On November 24, 2009 the RTC denied the motion to quash, ruled that the information in substance charged Section 5(i) (psychological violence) rather than Section 5(e), par. 2 (economic abuse), and ordered the City Prosecutor to amend the information’s designation; Reyes was subsequently arraigned and pleaded not guilty.
At trial the prosecution presented testimony from the private complainant, AAA, her physician and AAA’s daughter establishing that Reyes and AAA were married in 1969, had four children, and that Reyes—then a pilot working abroad—suddenly ceased giving financial support in July 2005 while AAA’s health deteriorated. Reyes testified as lone defense witness, denying valid marriage (claiming forgery), asserting a common‑law relationship and that he provided support until July 2006, after which he stopped because AAA filed a bigamy case against him.
On March 3, 2016 the RTC found Reyes guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of three (3) years prision correccional (minimum) to eight (8) years and one (1) day prision mayor (maximum). Reyes appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
On June 23, 2017 the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 38609 affirmed the RTC decision, holding that Reyes committed psychological violence by suddenly withholding financial support and that his legal obligation to support his wife remained until annulment, and noting that deprivation of support is punishable under Section 5(e), par. 2 if properly charged.
Reyes file...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the information charging petitioner sufficient under Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, such that the RTC did not err in denying the Motion to Quash?
- Did the evidence establish beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner violated Section 5(i) of R.A. No. 9262 (psychological violence) by denying financial support, and what penalty and ancilla...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)