Title
Morillo vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 198270
Decision Date
Dec 9, 2015
Petitioner sold materials, issued checks dishonored in Makati. MeTC had jurisdiction; CA dismissal on jurisdiction, not acquittal. SC reinstated RTC decision.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 165443)

Antecedent Facts

In July 2003, Richard Natividad and his partners purchased construction materials worth Php 500,054.00 from Armilyn Morillo's business, with the arrangement that payment would be made in a series of post-dated checks. After some initial payments, the subsequent checks were dishonored when presented due to insufficient funds, prompting Morillo to file criminal complaints against Natividad and his partners for violations of BP 22.

Procedural History

Two Informations were filed against Natividad on August 12, 2004, related to the issuer's failure to honor two checks, which were dishonored for insufficient funds. The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) found Natividad guilty of violating BP 22 and imposed a fine while ordering joint payment to Morillo. Natividad appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), arguing that the MeTC lacked jurisdiction as the checks were issued and delivered in Pampanga, not Makati.

RTC Ruling

The RTC affirmed the MeTC's decision, asserting that the dishonoring of the checks constituted a continuing offense, thus allowing jurisdiction where the offense was materialized, which included Makati due to the presentation of the checks there.

Court of Appeals Decision

On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the lower courts' decisions, concluding that all essential elements of the offense transpired in Pampanga, including the issuance, knowledge of dishonor, and dishonor of checks, thus dismissing the case on procedural grounds regarding improper venue.

Petitioner’s Argument

Morillo contended that the Court of Appeals erred in ascertaining proper jurisdiction, arguing that the MeTC of Makati had jurisdiction as the checks were presented and dishonored there. She cited previous rulings supporting that the act of presentation and knowledge of dishonor are elements that bestow jurisdiction upon the court where these occurred.

Respondent's Argument

Natividad, supported by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), maintained that the Court of Appeals correctly determined that the MeTC lacked jurisdiction, arguing that the place where the check was deposited and the place of dishonor does not carry the same legal weight in jurisdiction as where the offense was materially committed.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court held that violations of BP 22 qualify as transitory or continuing offenses, allowing prosecution in the jurisdiction where any substantive elements occurred. The Court agreed with Morillo that the MeTC in Makati had jurisdiction since it involved actions taken in Makati, specifically the dishonor of checks which were presented for payment there.

Discussion on Procedural Aspects

The Court addressed the procedural question of whether the private petitioner (Morillo) could appeal without the participation of the OSG. It found that the case presented s

...continue reading

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