Title
Supreme Court
Cruz vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 197142
Decision Date
Oct 9, 2019
A 1986 ejectment case led to obstruction claims against petitioners, including a mayor, for delaying writ enforcement. Supreme Court acquitted due to lack of conspiracy evidence and failure to prove graft charges.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 187858)

Facts and Procedural History

The events leading up to the case began with an ejectment complaint filed in 1986 by Maria Rosario Batongbacal and others against Marcelo L. Del Rosario and his spouse. Following a favorable judgment for the plaintiffs, multiple writs of execution and demolition were issued but faced persistent obstruction. On March 5, 1993, Cruz, Dela Cruz, Carpio, and others reportedly interfered with the execution of these writs. This led to a complaint lodged by Atty. Mario A. Batongbacal with the Office of the Ombudsman, resulting in the indictment of the petitioners.

Prosecution's Case

The prosecution presented several witnesses, including Atty. Batongbacal, various Sheriffs, and others involved in the attempted demolition. They testified about the obstruction of the demolition process purportedly instigated by the petitioners, detailing incidents where the sheriffs and demolition team were prevented from carrying out their duties by Mayor Dela Cruz and his associates. The prosecution argued that there was evident conspiracy and bad faith among the petitioners that disadvantaged the plaintiffs while providing unwarranted benefits to others, particularly a person named Alexander Halili.

Defense’s Argument

The defense focused on the lack of conspiracy, asserting that the petitioners acted within the scope of their responsibilities as public officials. Cruz and Dela Cruz denied actively preventing the court's orders and instead maintained that they were present to clarify property ownership issues, purportedly acting in their constituents' interests. Testimonies from petitioners contended that the sheriffs, rather than the mayor, ordered the demolition to cease.

Sandiganbayan's Decision

The Sandiganbayan found Cruz and Dela Cruz guilty of violating Section 3(e) of RA 3019, sentencing them to imprisonment ranging from six years and one month to ten years. The court ruled there was sufficient evidence showing they obstructed the court's legal processes, which resulted in undue benefits to a private party through their actions, showcasing evident bad faith and manifest partiality.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

Upon appeal, the Supreme Court addressed the implications of Dela Cruz's death during the proceedings, ultimately concluding that this extinguished his criminal liability. The court explained that Dela Cruz’s death rendered the Sandiganbayan’s judgment against him ineffectual. The Court then examined the cases of Cruz and Carpio, finding that the prosecution failed to prove their culpabil

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.