G.R. No. L-38711 - Sycip vs. Court of Appeals

The petitioner contended that the Court of Appeals erred in denying him a hearing, invoking Section 9 of Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Court and Sections 1 and 17 of Article IV of the New Constitution.
The Supreme Court found this argument to be without merit, stating that the petitioner had been afforded the right to be present during the trial in the Court of First Instance.
The right to be present and heard during an appeal is not absolute; it is discretionary for the appellate court to decide whether to hold oral arguments.
The Court of Appeals may deliberate on the case based on the evidence already presented without requiring the presence of the accused-appellant.

The petitioner argued that the Court of Appeals erred in not applying the provisions on compensation under Articles 1278 and 1279 of the Civil Code.
The Supreme Court ruled that compensation could not occur because Jose K. Lapuz was merely an agent of Albert Smith and/or Dr. Dwight Dill, and thus did not have the standing to offset debts.
For compensation to be valid, both parties must be creditors and debtors in their own right, which was not the case here.
The trial court correctly noted that Lapuz did not consent to offset his obligation with the petitioner’s obligation to pay for the shares.

The petitioner claimed that the appellate court erred in not ruling that the deed of sale was a consummated contract and not subject to the Statute of Frauds.
The Supreme Court emphasized that this issue was not raised in the trial court or the Court of Appeals and could not be introduced for the first time in the Supreme Court.
Consequently, there was no need for the appellate court to make findings of fact regarding this matter.

The petitioner asserted that the Court of Appeals erred in affirming his conviction for estafa, referencing the requirements established in People vs. Benitez.
The Supreme Court noted that the evidence indicated the petitioner had received the shares for sale but failed to turn over the proceeds, demonstrating in...continue reading