Title
Caca vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 116962
Decision Date
Jul 7, 1997
Petitioner convicted of BP 22 violation for issuing dishonored check; denial and financial incapacity claims rejected; lower courts' rulings upheld.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 116962)

Background of the Case

The case arose from a series of loans obtained by Caca from Rile, wherein postdated checks were used as security. On three separate occasions, Caca secured loans amounting to P50,000.00, P125,000.00, and P250,000.00, respectively. While the first two checks were redeemed in cash before their due dates, the third check issued for the amount of P250,000.00 was not redeemed and was deposited by Rile, resulting in the check being dishonored.

Evidence and Defense

Caca denied any dealings with Rile and claimed she did not owe P250,000.00. She alleged the check was pre-signed and lost, later falling into the hands of Rile, who filled it out. Witnesses for the defense, including a security guard and a co-worker, asserted her claims, revealing she was present at work during the time of the alleged transaction and lacked the financial capacity to borrow such amounts.

Judgment of the Regional Trial Court

After a trial, the Regional Trial Court found Caca guilty only of the violation of BP 22 and sentenced her to six months of imprisonment, as well as ordering her to pay Rile the granted amount with legal interest from the time the case was filed until full payment. The Court of Appeals subsequently affirmed this decision.

Legal Analysis and Findings

Caca contended that the trial court overlooked her arguments regarding the credibility of Rile's assertions and failed to recognize her claimed lack of financial capability as a valid defense. However, the Court underscored the respect owed to the trial court's evaluation of witness credibility, affirming that such findings should not be disturbed absent a compelling reason.

The appellate court noted the absence of any motive for Rile to falsely accuse Caca of the debt, thereby reinforcing that Caca's denial lacked substantive support. The theory that her

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.