Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 34 views

    CD - Treñas - Vs.people

    Uploaded by

    June Karl Cepida
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Hector Treñas and dismissed the estafa case against him due to lack of jurisdiction by the Regional Trial Court of Makati City. The trial court failed to establish that any elements of the alleged crime took place in Makati. While Treñas was accused of issuing a bounced check in Makati, the prosecution did not prove that the offense or any acts material to the crime occurred in Makati. The case was dismissed without prejudice and referred to the IBP for further investigation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    CD - Treñas - Vs.people

    Uploaded by

    June Karl Cepida
    34 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Hector Treñas and dismissed the estafa case against him due to lack of jurisdiction by the Regional Trial Court of Makati City. The trial court failed to establish that any elements of the alleged crime took place in Makati. While Treñas was accused of issuing a bounced check in Makati, the prosecution did not prove that the offense or any acts material to the crime occurred in Makati. The case was dismissed without prejudice and referred to the IBP for further investigation.

    Original Description:

    crimlaw case digest 4

    Original Title

    CD - Treñas.vs.People

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Hector Treñas and dismissed the estafa case against him due to lack of jurisdiction by the Regional Trial Court of Makati City. The trial court failed to establish that any elements of the alleged crime took place in Makati. While Treñas was accused of issuing a bounced check in Makati, the prosecution did not prove that the offense or any acts material to the crime occurred in Makati. The case was dismissed without prejudice and referred to the IBP for further investigation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    34 views2 pages

    CD - Treñas - Vs.people

    Uploaded by

    June Karl Cepida
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Hector Treñas and dismissed the estafa case against him due to lack of jurisdiction by the Regional Trial Court of Makati City. The trial court failed to establish that any elements of the alleged crime took place in Makati. While Treñas was accused of issuing a bounced check in Makati, the prosecution did not prove that the offense or any acts material to the crime occurred in Makati. The case was dismissed without prejudice and referred to the IBP for further investigation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    OCD – Hector Treñas vs.

    People of the Philippines

    G. R. No. 195002, January 25, 2012

    Facts:

    December 1999, Margarita Alocija wanted to buy a house-and-lot in Iloilo City with TCT No. 109266
    which was then mortgaged with Maybank. For advices regarding the transfer of the title in Margarita’s
    name, the bank manager recommended Hector Treñas to the employee and niece of Margarita,
    Elizabeth.

    Hector informed Elizabeth with the expenses of the transfer which Elizabeth gave P150,000. The latter
    issued a corresponding receipt dated December 22, 1999 and prepared a Deed of Sale with Assumption
    of Mortgage. However, when she consulted with the BIR, she was informed that the receipts were fake.

    When confronted, Hector admitted to her that the receipts were fake and that he used the P120,000.00
    for his other transactions. Elizabeth demanded the return of the money.

    To settle his accounts, appellant Hector issued in favor of Elizabeth a Bank of Commerce check No.
    0042856 dated November 10, 2000 in the amount of P120, 000.00, deducting from P150,000.00 the
    P30,000.00 as attorney's fees. When the check was deposited with the PCI Bank, Makati Branch, the
    same was dishonoured for the reason that the account was closed. Notwithstanding repeated formal
    and verbal demands, appellant failed to pay. Thus, the instant case of Estafa was filed against him in the
    RTC of Makati.

    During arraignment on 26 April 2002, petitioner, acting as his own counsel, entered a plea of "Not
    Guilty." Allegedly due to old age and poor health, and the fact that he lives in Iloilo City, petitioner was
    unable to attend the pre-trial and trial of the case.

    On 8 January 2007, the RTC rendered a Decision finding petitioner guilty of the crime of Estafa under
    section 1, paragraph (b), of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code.

    After filing several motions and appeals, the petitioner raised the argument that the RTC of Makati had
    no jurisdiction over the offense charged. The trial court denied the motion, without citing any specific
    evidence upon which its findings were based, and by relying on conjecture. There is nothing in the
    documentary evidence offered by the prosecution that points to where the offense, or any of its
    elements, was committed.

    Issues:

    1. Can the Regional Trial Court of Makati acquire jurisdiction over the crime of Estafa which the

    Prosecution failed to allege any of the acts material to such crime had occurred in Makati City?

    Ruling:
    The Petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated 9 July 2010 and the Resolution dated 4 January 2011
    issued by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 32177 are SET ASIDE on the ground of lack of
    jurisdiction on the part of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 137, Makati City.

    Criminal Case No. 01-2409 is DISMISSED without prejudice. This case is REFERRED to the IBP Board of
    Governors for investigation and recommendation pursuant to Section 1 of Rule 139B of the Rules of
    Court.

    You might also like