Notice Second Division Nov 11 2015

7/24/2019 Notice Second Division Nov 11 2015

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/notice-second-division-nov-11-2015 1/6

REPUBLIC

OF THE

PHILIPPINES

SUPREME

COI.IRT

Manila

SECOND

DIVISION

I{OTICE

Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take

notice

that

ihe Ccurt,

Second

Dittision,

issued

a

Resolution

dated

1 1

November

20L5

which

reads

as

follows:

*G.R.

No.

21925

7

(Alfrecto Y.

Po

vs.

Ombudsman

Conchifa

carpio

Morales

of

the

office

of

the

ombudsman,lYationol

Bureau

of

Investigation

and Ernesto

de

las Sontos).-

Considering

the

allegations,

issues

and arguments

adduced

ih

the

petition

for

review

on

certiorari

assailing

the I)ecision

dated

16

September

2014

and

Resolution

dated

18 June

2015 of

the Court

of

Appeals,

l,zlanila

in

CA=G.R.

SP

No.

130682,

the

Court

resolves

to DENY

the

petition

for

failure

to

sufficiently

show

any

reversible

error in

the

assailed

judgment

to warrant

the exercise

of

this

Court's

discretionary

appellate

jurisdiction,

aud

for

raising

substantially factual

issues.

Brion, J.,

on

leave;

Relses, J.,

designated

acting

member

per

S.O.

No,

2274.

Mendoza,

J.,

on

leave;

Perlas-Bernabe,

J-,

designated

acting

member

per

S.O.

No. 227l.'

Very

truly

yours,

MA.

LOURDES

C.

PERFECTO

Division

Clerk

of

Court

By:

Div

INO-TUAZON,

;i*k #c" **'lfit'/rt'

(23s)

-NTORE.



EPUBLIC

OF

THE

PF,IILIPPINES

REGIONAL

TRtrAL

COURT

FIRST

JUDICIAL

REGIOhI

BRANCH

6,

BAGUIO

CITY

THE

PE

LE

PHILIPPI

ES,

P

TI-NE

intiff,

CRIMINAL

CASE

NO.

36gS2.R

(M\TCC

Crirn.

tVo.

730536)

FoT:

PERJURY

s"

ALBI

A

DEC S ON

itled

case

is

an

appeal

from

the

Decislon

dated

ftvtrareh

:10,

ed

by

MTCC

Branch

1,'Baguio

City.

lt

was

naffled

x5

i

on

Nll

h

26,

2015.

Thereafter,

the

parties

we "e

nequired

sn-*irra onnaql

hniefe

Thn nrivate cornnlainAnt'S

eir

appeal

briefs.

The

prlvate

cornplalnant's

to

tl'ris

Co

to submit

appellee

aeeursed

for Judicia

resol'i;tIon

Eispu

nSe

af

sfi

titeO

on

April

27

,

2015

while

the

appellant's

bnief

cf

on

May

21,

2A15.

This

ease

was

erroneoulsly

set

Resolution (JDR)

henee

it

was

only

submitted

fon

mber

9,

2015.

Decision

dated

March

18,

2015

found

aeculsed-

Atbiento

guilty

of the

crime

of

per.lury as

defined

t

perjury

defined

and

penalized

wnder

Articte

vised

Penal

Code.

There

being

na

attendant

ed-appellant

on

November

'15,

2012

before

notary

ne

Rarang

where

he

stated

that

Ernesto

de

los

appellant

under

Arti

of

the

SSAi

rland

n

183

the

Revi?ed

Penal

Code.

The

dispositive

portiont

FORE,

in

conforrnity

with

the

foregoing,

accused

ORLA/VDC

R.

ALB/E,VTO

Euifty

cfifne

the

|s,

the

court

senfences

hirn

to

suffer

an

t

of

indeterminate

penalty

of

30

days

of

rn

ifs

maximum

period

to

2

years

and

4

sof

Cosfs

ainst

the

accused.

DERED."

XO

the

matter

is

the

Salaysay

(sworn

statennent)

executed

acct.t

Rosa

ublic

the

atff

x83

Santos,

acc

n

a

qualified

theft

case

docketed

as

Criminal

I

i



(UMI)

o

appelXant

s

against

oath

in

his

la

'{3"

akali,

apli

yon,

ku

pa

kal

png

'f

4.

na

kon

d

CI

es

"4

to'04-E".

o

Atty.

Ernesto

de

/os

Sanfos

sariling

temPorary

electrica

ay

mabilis

na

rneter

pa{:a

sa

ease

Ntro.

Toulrist

Inn

306-

BPTI)

BPTI

uet

uet

,

did

not

steal

electricity

frorn

thre

Benguet

Fine

The

Board

of

Trustees

of

the

university

of

f\ltranila

T',he

instant case

for

perjury against

accused-

by

UM

President

Ennily

de

Leon

orl

May

12,

2A13

lant

for

making

the

followinE

statennents

ulnder

naong

June

2'1,

2007"

x

x

x

tem

rneter

na

sumusukat

sa

konsumao

ng

te

CTLL

Buitding.

Ang

katunaYan

ng

;

ang

dalawang

lingga rnula

sa

nasabing

ng

firoposed

CTLL

buitding

ay

nakabitan

rlg

sariting

rnetro

ng

CTLL

Buf

lding

ay

uyZuy

na

ito

bitang

Annexes

"S" and

"3-A"'

makabitan

ng

sariling

rnetro,

ay

nagsirnwla

Buitding

na

magbayad

na

ng

sarili

nitang

kuryeite.

Ang

katwnayan

ng

kanilang

ay

'katakip

ng

Sataysay

na

ito

bilang

o

.17

pa

Bu

rysay

kong

ito

ay

aking

isinagawa

n'\yq

patinay

ia

sirnula

nang

itayg

a"ng

C.TLL

"ala

bitang

Dely's

lnn,

ay

hindi

ito

kumuha

a

E

kuryente

na

nagdadaaan

sa

tnetra

ng

kaw

Pa

s

Tiurist lnn

o

kumanekta

ng

"ill7gaf"

sa

xxxx

r

the

lower

court

erred

in

finding

llant

made

a

statement

under

8en

ng

nan

Be

t

ita

SA

The

ay

ma

sariii

ning

metro

na

sumusukat

ng

kaniyang

k

uma.

e

Towrist

lnn.

Ang

paggamit

ng

ATLL

Euilding

,rrner

ng

tsenguet

Flnes

a)/

kindi

lugan

ng

Pagnanakaw

nE

kwryente

ng

eJ

sapag

kat

ang

CTLL

Euilding

bago

pa

man

xxxx"

were the

issues

raised

by

the

accused-appefllant

tn

that

the

oath

or

-a

a,

t"ris bni

affidavit

upon

a

material

matter'

rl

i

I

I

I

I

i

I



Decisiort

Criminal

Case

i6992-R

"wh

r

the

lowen

court

gravely

erred

that

plie

for

service

connectlon

was

not

in

nGe

y

accused-aPPellant.

in

finding

presented

a

p

ofa

who

CTL

lseho

San

ed-ap

I

who

bui d

5.W

ap

e

W

nga

The

rime

Art.

83.

F

affi

pplied

buildi

owned

by

the

said

Atty.

Ernesto

d,q

los

her

the

lower

count

erred

in

finding

that

the

rllant

made

a

willfui

and

dellbenate

assertlon

f

iln

stating

that

it

was

Ennesto

de

ios

Santos

fon

a

temporary

electric

conneetion

for

the

hen

the

lswer

court

erred

in

tinding that

the

rllant

made

a

willful

arrd

deliberate

assertlon

J

in

statlng

that

it

was

Atty'

Ernesto

de

los

aid

for

the

eleetricity

coRsurRed

by

the

CTI-I-

rer

the

lower

count

erred

in

finding

that

prior

i

"f

tn"

electrical

apptication

of

Atty'

Ernesto

ofa

San

thr

trr(

to

de

SLI

,io*

on

APnil

15,

Z}fi,

he

had

been

y

using/taking

the

electricity

of

the

BpTl'

ther

the

lower

court

erred

in

giving

weight

to

,ts

of

Policanpio

Lacsa

that

he

connected

the

eriod

to

prision correccional

in

its

minimum

6e

imposed

upon

any

person

who,

knowin.gly

I

statements

and

not

being

inclurded

in

the

the

next

preceding

articles,

shall

testify

of

the

CflU

building

to

that

of

BFTi'

ether

the

lower

court

gravely

erred

sed-appellant

of

ttre

cnime

of

perjury'

COURT'S

RULING

per.iury

as

defined

and

penalized

under

Article

reads:

/se

fesfim

ony

in

other

cases

and

periury

.i

nation.

The

penalty

of

arresto

rnayor

in

its

in

183

of

the

max

perit

m

shall

ti

NS

und

oath

make

an

affidavit,

upon

any

material

matten

ii,

'1

I

I

I

I

rii

l

iI

I

I



l,

i

I

I

t

Any

lieu

me

of

oath

L/d

aeo

f]

an

oned

lt

that

is

me

petent

person

authorized

to

admlnister

an

in

which

the

law so

requlres'

,

in

case

of

a

solernn

affirmation

made

in

r.

shall

eornmii

L''Y

of

the

.fals-[?: :

,

i-'itil

;ft

ih.

thnee

precedins

antieles

-t

rfi

suffer

the

respective

penalties

il

,I

I

I

./

a)

b)

The

leme

of

perjury

are:

evi

made

a statement

under

oatl"r

on

executed

affi

a

it

upon

a

rnatenial

matter"

;;;;i

ut

affidavit

was

.

made,

,{?:i-:

';ffi[Lt,;rd-il;d

ts

neceive

and

admlnister

nt

sr

affidavit,

the

acctlsed

nrade

a

wlllful

te

assertiorl

of

a

falsehood'

L?;?#;;i.lT

ririJavit

eontaining

the

falsitv

is

by

law

or

made

fon

a

legal

Purpose'

thene

is

aeaused

allegatio

ful

examination

of

the

records'

the

Cotlrt

finds

tha]

lence

directly

sunitantiatlng

the

accusation

thal

t

comnnitted

perjury'

The,

private

eomplaiRantts

cused-appellant"#iliiirv

and

d.eliberately

asserted

e

>ly

her

infenenee";;;ilb

frorm

the

faet

that

aeeused

d

a

Sa/a

ysay

'o

tuuo'

oT

Etneuto

de

los

Santos'

alseho

appella

As

exeeu

WAS

in

the

q

litied

of

th

ateriali

de

los

n

r,

Service

onne

Sa/aYsa

whiah

pointed

out

by

the

accused-appellant'

the

Sa/aysaJ

d

etennn

I

native

fi

h.

;;

i

ri

;ry

;"

; y-

:f

::--P3-1fl

j

_lrxu:'H;;;rJ

ilu:n"sis

to

eonetude

that

the

Sa/aysay

would

serve

to

col'lvict

or

acquit

Es"r'lesto

qualitied

theft

case'

i

Ernesto

Bajo,

a

los

ccused-appellant's

Exhibit

'l'13"

(Applieation

-

fQr

on)

is

a

slarins

"']0"*""

*,^i" y3:;:""lili?*f,:-ft

ffjr:;ft3'ii#r

the

account

was

under

the

name*Q{

iantos.

This

troi

*'=

testitled

to

P-Y,}ryi:

B^?,ll3yl3

'-?il;"""""'

+hd

";hibit

has

been

adn'ritted

in

evidenQe,

th

e

state

rne

nt

;f

";;;";;ut o

n

"witn

911

-9'11*:F3"i

;:

}[:].,5'orJ'*1..,;;'il"d

f9r

fle

service

connectioin.

rt

stated

in

his

satavsav

that

it

J;{EJ:::1fl:,

L4i

1$ifltlpijri"IhJ"

IiJ

ti]"'*

i'

no

farsehood

,??*]"11

'it'

il-

#lo

triilr.

-

ir,"

application

for

temporaiy

BENECO

snows

that

lt

was

under

the

narne

lJ

Santos.

There

;;"

no

falsehood

committed

wh$n

I

and

it

who

Accuse

pel

ated

that

Santos

as

he

ofi

ccn

Ennesto

del



aeeused

nt stated

in

hls

Salaysay

that after

the

nret$r

installat

n, the CT[-L

building oommerlced

payment

of

its electrieflll

;cused-appellant based

his

statenrents

on

BEi{EeOp

60RSUrTl

neeords

present

nd

is

not

'

privy

to

whatever

payrnent

arrangem"t u

UM and CTLI-.

lower

eourt

erred

in

passing

upon

the

issue on

whether

Qn

had

=n

a theft

of electricity

use by

Ernesto de

los Santqs

i

is for the

propei

tribunal

to

nule.

upCIn

aft$r

evidence.

The sole issue

in

this

instant

ease

{u

:cused-appellant cornmltted

perjuny

in

his

Salaysay.

" Th

not the

and

B

p "ese

on

of

whether

not

rules tl'r

made

detersml

e

rirninaI

or-r

tsEhl

ion

ase

CO

Il,

the

of

per.

ngl

the

to

the

elements

of the crime

of

perjury,

tl'lis eourt

and third

elements

are

not

present.

The

statennents

l-appelNant

in his Sa/ays ay

are

not nnateria

in

thp

good

fai I

amd

deli

d-appellant

rn

hrs

sa/aysay

are

Rot rnatenal rn

tr]F

the

guilt

or

innocence of

Ernesto

de

[o,s

Santos

iil

r.

32306-R.

Accused-appellant

based his staternent$

*'Ja

,*o Jd;;;G

f{T--';riu**,,t,

were

h;; ;;F

'etation

of

the said

docunnents

and

he

did

not wiilfullp

assert

a

falsehood.

I

I

lourt

finds that

the

accused-appellant

is

not

guiffiy

{t

I

lry'

l

)RE, in view of the foregoing,

.iudgment

is nenderefl

ssailed

Decision

dated

Nltrarch

10, Z}ffi issued

"h[

,

Baguio

City

and

hereby

enters a

new

one

acqulttinp

s and

docurnents.

His

statemerrts were his

ow

tion of

the said

docunnents

and

he

did

not wiilfull

Orlando

Albiento of the crime of

perjuny

as

the

aets

eh

ed do

constitute

perjury.

lrlo costs.

ORDE

ED"

7,

2015.

Bagulo City.

Ct'

s'CS,

GEGIL A

ON

S.

DU

Acting

Presiding

J

EREF

reversi

thre

eflTec-

aecused

ppel

I

,1,

I

Documents

Notice Second Division Nov 11 2015