Case No. 45 REYNALDO H. JAYLO, WILLIAM VALENZONA AND ANTONIO G. HABALO, HABALO, Petitioners, Petitioners , v.SANDIGANBAYAN v.SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND HEIRS OF COL. ROLANDO DE GUZMAN, FRANCO CALANOG AND AVELINO MANGUERA, MANGUERA, Respondents. Respondents . G.R. Nos. 1!1"#$"%, J&'&* #1, #+1" SERENO,
C.J.
F&-s Petitioners Jaylo, Valenzona and Habalo, together with Castro, were officers of the PNP Western Police District laced on secial detail with the N!". #hey were con$icted by the %andiganbayan for Ho&icide for the 'illing of (stella, )ranco and *olando in a dr+g b+y b+st oeration at the agallanes Co&&ercial Center on J+ly -, -//. D+ring the ro&+lgation on 0ril -1, 21, none of the acc+sed aeared before the co+rt desite notice, th+s the decision was ro&+lgated in absentia and the 3+dg&ent entered in the cri&inal doc'et. #heir bail bonds were cancelled and warrants for their arrest iss+ed. n 0ril , 21, the acc+sed thr+ co+nsel filed a otion for Partial *econsideration of the Decision, b+t on No$e&ber 2/, 21, the %andiganbayan too' no action on the &otion and ordered the i&le&entation of the warrants of arrest, holding that the -56day eriod fro& the ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent had long assed witho+t any of the acc+sed gi$ing any reason for their non6aearance d+ring the ro&+lgation. 7nder %ection 8 *+le -2 of the *+les of Co+rt, the acc+sed ha$e lost the re&edies a$ailable +nder the *+les against the %andiganbayan9s 3+dg&ent of con$iction, incl+ding the filing of a &otion for reconsideration. #heir &otion for reconsideration denied, they filed a etition for re$iew on certiorari before the %+re&e Co+rt, holding that %ection 8 *+le -2 cannot di&inish, &odify or increase s+bstanti$e rights li'e the filing of a &otion for reconsideration +nder P.D. -88, and the conditions set by %ection 8 *+le -2 does not obtain in their case. #hey also aealed the &erits of their con$iction for ho&icide by the %andiganbayan. Iss/: Iss/ : WN the nonaearance of the acc+sed at the ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent of con$iction is considered to ha$e lost their standing in co+rt. R0'2 S/-o' 3, R0/ 1#+, o4 5/ R0/s o4 Co 6o78/s 5& &' &--s/8 95o 4&0/8 o &66/& & 5/ 6o:02&o' o4 5/ ;82:/' o4 -o'7-o' s5&00 0os/ 5/ /:/8/s &7&0&<0/ &2&'s 5/ s&8 ;82:/'.
"n case the acc+sed fails to aear at the sched+led date of ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent desite notice, the ro&+lgation shall be &ade by recording the 3+dg&ent in the cri&inal doc'et and ser$ing hi& a coy thereof at his last 'nown address or thr+ his co+nsel. "f the 3+dg&ent is for con$iction and the fail+re of the acc+sed to aear was witho+t 3+stifiable ca+se, he shall lose the re&edies a$ailable in these r+les against the 3+dg&ent and the co+rt shall order his arrest. Within fifteen ;-5< days fro& ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent, howe$er, the acc+sed &ay s+rrender and file a &otion for lea$e of co+rt to a$ail of these re&edies. He shall state the reasons for his absence at the sched+led ro&+lgation and if he ro$es that his absence was for a 3+stifiable ca+se, he shall be allowed to a$ail of said re&edies within fifteen ;-5< days fro& notice. (=cet when the con$iction is for a light offense, in which case the 3+dg&ent &ay be rono+nced in the resence of the co+nsel for the acc+sed or the latter9s reresentati$e, the acc+sed is re>+ired to be resent at the sched+led date of ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent. Notice of the sched+le of ro&+lgation shall be &ade to the acc+sed ersonally or thro+gh the bonds&an or warden and co+nsel. #he ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent shall roceed e$en in the absence of the acc+sed desite notice. #he ro&+lgation in absentia shall be &ade by recording the 3+dg&ent in the cri&inal doc'et and ser$ing a coy thereof to the acc+sed at their last 'nown address or thro+gh co+nsel. #he co+rt shall also order the arrest of the acc+sed if the 3+dg&ent is for con$iction and the fail+re to aear was witho+t 3+stifiable ca+se. "f the 3+dg&ent is for con$iction and the fail+re to aear was witho+t 3+stifiable ca+se, the acc+sed shall lose the re&edies a$ailable in the *+les of Co+rt against the 3+dg&ent. #h+s, it is inc+&bent +on the acc+sed to aear on the sched+led date of ro&+lgation, beca+se it deter&ines the a$ailability of their ossible re&edies against the 3+dg&ent of con$iction. When the acc+sed fail to resent the&sel$es at the ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent of con$iction, they lose the re&edies of filing a &otion for a new trial or reconsideration ;*+le -2-< and an aeal fro& the 3+dg&ent of con$iction ;*+le -22<. When the acc+sed on bail fail to resent the&sel$es at the ro&+lgation of a 3+dg&ent of con$iction, they are considered to ha$e lost their standing in co+rt. Witho+t any standing in co+rt, the acc+sed cannot in$o'e its 3+risdiction to see' relief. S/-o' 3, R0/ 1#+, o4 5/ R0/s o4 Co, 8o/s 'o &=/ &9&* s ://0* 6o78/s 5/ :&''/ 5o25 95-5 &' /?s'2 25 :&* :60/:/'/8. Petitioners9 arg+&ent lac's &erit when they clai& that their right to file a &otion for recon or an aeal has a stat+tory origin, as ro$ided +nder %ection 1 of P.D. -88. ?i'e an aeal, the right to file a &otion for recon is a stat+tory grant or ri$ilege. 0s a stat+tory right, the filing of a &otion for recon is to be e=ercised in accordance with and in the &anner ro$ided by law. #h+s, a arty filing a &otion for recon &+st strictly co&ly with the re>+isites laid down in the *+les of Co+rt.
0side fro& the condition that a &otion for recon &+st be filed within -5 days fro& the ro&+lgation or notice of the 3+dg&ent, the &o$ant &+st also co&ly with the conditions laid down in the *+les of Co+rt, which alies to all cases and roceedings filed with the %andiganbayan. Petitioners insist that the right to file a &otion for recon +nder %ection 1 of P.D. -88 is a g+arantee, and no a&o+nt of *+les ro&+lgated by the %+re&e Co+rt can oerate to di&inish or &odify this s+bstanti$e right. %ection 8, *+le -2, of the *+les of Co+rt, does not ta'e away er se the right of the con$icted acc+sed to a$ail of the re&edies +nder the *+les. "t is the fail+re of the acc+sed to aear witho+t 3+stifiable ca+se on the sched+led date of ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent of con$iction that forfeits their right to a$ail the&sel$es of the re&edies against the 3+dg&ent. "n this case, etitioners ha$e 3+st shown their lac' of faith in the 3+risdiction of the %andiganbayan by not aearing before it for the ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent on their cases. %+rely they cannot later on e=ect to be allowed to in$o'e the %andiganbayan9s 3+risdiction to grant the& relief fro& its 3+dg&ent of con$iction. I s '-:' 6o' 5/ &--s/8 o s5o9 ;s4&<0/ -&s/ 4o 5/ &+ences of the 3+dg&ent against the&. 7on s+rrender, the acc+sed &+st re>+est er&ission of the co+rt to a$ail of the re&edies by &a'ing clear the reasons for their fail+re to attend the ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent of con$iction. Clearly, the con$icted acc+sed are the ones who sho+ld show that their reason for being absent at the ro&+lgation of 3+dg&ent was 3+stifiable. #h+s, +nless they s+rrender and ro$e their 3+stifiable reason to the satisfaction of the co+rt, their absence is res+&ed to be +n3+stified. Petitioners did not s+rrender within -5 days fro& the ro&+lgation of the 3+dg&ent of con$iction. Neither did they as' for lea$e of co+rt to a$ail the&sel$es of the re&edies, and state the reasons for their absence. "n $iew thereof, this Co+rt no longer has the ower to cond+ct a re$iew of the findings and concl+sions in the Decision of the %andiganbayan. WH(*()*(, the etition is D(N"(D.
C&s/ No. %3 G.R. No. 1%%", J&'&* 1%, #+1" RODRIGO RIVERA, Petitioner , v. SPOUSES SALVADOR CHUA AND S. VIOLETA CHUA,Respondents. @G.R. NO. 1%%# SPS. SALVADOR CHUA AND VIOLETA S. CHUA, Petitioners, v. RODRIGO RIVERA, Respondent . PEREZ,
J.
F&-s #he arties were friends of long standing ha$ing 'nown each other since -/1. *i$era obtained a loan fro& the %o+ses Ch+a in the a&o+nt of -2,. *i$era ro&ised to ay the so+ses on Dece&ber -, -//5. "n ctober -//B, al&ost three years fro& the date of ay&ent sti+lated in the ro&issory note, *i$era, as artial ay&ent for the loan, iss+ed and deli$ered to the %o+ses Ch+a, as ayee, a chec' drawn against *i$era9s c+rrent acco+nt in the a&o+nt of P25,.. n 2- Dece&ber -//B, the %o+ses Ch+a recei$ed another chec' res+&ably iss+ed by *i$era, li'ewise drawn against *i$era9s PC"! c+rrent acco+nt, blan' as to ayee and a&o+nt. P+rortedly, both chec's were si&ly artial ay&ent for *i$era9s loan in the rincial a&o+nt of P-2,.. 7on resent&ent for ay&ent, the two chec's were dishonored for the reason @acco+nt closed.A #he a&o+nt d+e the %o+ses Ch+a was egged at P88,. co$ering the rincial of P-2,. l+s fi$e ercent ;5< interest er &onth fro& - Jan+ary -//8 to - ay -///. #he %o+ses Ch+a alleged that they ha$e reeatedly de&anded ay&ent fro& *i$era to no a$ail. !eca+se of *i$era9s +n3+stified ref+sal to ay, the %o+ses Ch+a were constrained to file a s+it. *i$era co+ntered that he ne$er e=ec+ted the s+b3ect Pro&issory Note. He clai&ed forgery and denied his indebtedness. He clai&s that gi$en his friendshi with the %o+ses Ch+a who were &oney lenders, he has been able to &aintain a loan acco+nt with the&. *i$era oints o+t that the %o+ses Ch+a ne$er de&anded ay&ent for the loan for al&ost 4 years fro& the ti&e of the alleged defa+lt in ay&ent.
#he e#C r+led in fa$or of the %o+ses Ch+a. n aeal, the *#C anila affir&ed the Decision of the e#C. 7nda+nted, *i$era aealed to the C0 which affir&ed *i$era9s liability +nder the Pro&issory Note, red+ced the i&osition of interest on the loan fro& 8 to -2 per annum. Iss/ WN there was a $alid ro&issory note e=ec+ted by *i$era. WN the denial of the etition in .*. No. -B4412 is res judicata in its concet of @bar by rior 3+dg&entA on whether the Co+rt of 0eals correctly red+ced the interest rate sti+lated in the Pro&issory Note. R0'2 *i$era9s e$idence or lac' thereof consisted only of a barefaced clai& of forgery and a discordant defense to assail the a+thenticity and $alidity of the Pro&issory Note. He failed to discharge the b+rden of e$idence. 0lso, he failed to add+ce clear and con$incing e$idence that the signat+re on the ro&issory note is a forgery. #he fact of forgery cannot be res+&ed b+t &+st be ro$ed by clear, ositi$e and con$incing e$idence. #he Pro&issory Note in this case is &ade o+t to secific ersons, herein resondents, the %o+ses Ch+a, and not to order or to bearer, or to the order of the %o+ses Ch+a as ayees. Howe$er, e$en if *i$era9s Pro&issory Note is not a negotiable instr+&ent and therefore o+tside the co$erage of %ection 1 of the N"? which ro$ides that resent&ent for ay&ent is not necessary to charge the erson liable on the instr+&ent, *i$era is still liable +nder the ter&s of the Pro&issory Note that he iss+ed. #he sti+lation in the Pro&issory Note is designated as ay&ent of interest, not as a enal cla+se, and is si&ly an inde&nity for da&ages inc+rred by the %o+ses Ch+a beca+se *i$era defa+lted in the ay&ent of the a&o+nt of P-2,.. #he &eas+re of da&ages for the *i$era9s delay is li&ited to the interest sti+lated in the Pro&issory Note. "n at instances, in defa+lt of sti+lation, the interest is that ro$ided by law. "n this instance, the arties sti+lated that in case of defa+lt, *i$era will ay interest at the rate of 5 a &onth or 8 per annum. n this score, the aellate co+rt r+led that the &ere fail+re of %o+ses Ch+a to i&&ediately de&and or collect ay&ent of the $al+e of the note does not e=onerate *i$era fro& his liability therefro&. %ignificantly, the iss+e on ay&ent of interest has been disosed of in .*. No. -B4412 denying the etition of the %o+ses Ch+a for fail+re to s+fficiently show any re$ersible error in the r+ling of the aellate co+rt, secifically the red+ction of the interest rate i&osed on *i$era9s indebtedness +nder the Pro&issory Note. 7lti&ately, the denial of the etition in .*. No. -B4412 is res judicata in its concet of @bar by rior 3+dg&entA on whether the Co+rt of 0eals correctly red+ced the interest rate sti+lated in the Pro&issory Note.
Res judicata alies in the concet of @bar by rior 3+dg&entA if the following re>+isites conc+r: ;-< the for&er 3+dg&ent or order &+st be finalE ;2< the 3+dg&ent or order &+st be on the &eritsE ;< the decision &+st ha$e been rendered by a co+rt ha$ing 3+risdiction o$er the s+b3ect &atter and the artiesE and ;4< there &+st be, between the first and the second action, identity of arties, of s+b3ect &atter and of ca+ses of action. "n this case, the etitions in .*. Nos. -B445B and -B4412 in$ol$e an identity of arties and s+b3ect &atter raising secifically errors in the C0. Where the C09s disosition on the roriety of the red+ction of the interest rate was raised by the %o+ses Ch+a in .*. No. -B4412, the r+ling thereon affir&ing the C0 is a @bar by rior 3+dg&ent.A #he alicable rate of legal interest fro& - Jan+ary -//8, the date when *i$era defa+lted, to date when this Decision beco&es final is di$ided into two eriods reflecting two rates of legal interest: ;-< -2 per annum fro& - Jan+ary -//8 to J+ne 2-E and ;2< 8 per annum )* - J+ly 2- to date when this Decision beco&es final and e=ec+tory. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing. Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 6 per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or e!trajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of "rticle ##6$ of the %ivil %ode.
#he total a&o+nt owing to the %o+ses Ch+a Decision shall f+rther earn legal interest at the rate of 8 er ann+& co&+ted fro& its finality +ntil f+ll ay&ent thereof, the interi& eriod being dee&ed to be a forbearance of credit.
WHEREFORE, the etition in .*. No. -B445B is DENIED