Angulo v. People

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 250962. March 9, 2020.]

NOEL ANGULO, BILLY FUERTES, ROSE MARRERO, and JOSEPHINE PASARITA, petitioners,vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated09 March 2020which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 250962 (Noel Angulo, Billy Fuertes, Rose Marrero, and Josephine Pasarita 1v. People of the Philippines). — The Court NOTES the copy furnished the Court of the manifestation with motion to dismiss dated February 18, 2020 of Public Attorney's Office filed in the Court of Appeals (CA), stating that Rosito Sisgon (Sisgon), one of the accused-appellants, died on November 23, 2018, prior to promulgation of the CA's June 27, 2019 Decision, and praying that the case be dismissed against accused-appellant Sisgon, as his criminal liability was extinguished upon his death.

After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 2 and AFFIRM the June 27, 2019 Decision 3 and the December 6, 2019 Resolution 4 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 40466 for failure of petitioners Noel Angulo, Billy Fuertes, Rose Marrero, and Josephine Pasarita (petitioners) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in affirming their conviction, 5 under Section 46, in relation to Section 124 (3) of Republic Act No. 6938, 6 otherwise known as the "Cooperative Code of the Philippines."

As correctly ruled by the CA, the elements 7 of the crime charged were sufficiently established, as it was shown that each of the petitioners, as members of the Board of Directors of Bulawen Dairy Multi-Purpose Cooperative (BDMPC), acted in bad faith in directing the affairs of the cooperative by failing to promptly disclose the receipt of funds from the Department of Agrarian Reform to the members of BDMPC, and in using the same to grant loans in their own favor without the required approval of the cooperative's general membership, which is in violation of its by-laws. 8 It bears stressing that factual findings of trial courts, especially when affirmed by the CA, deserve respect and finality by this Court, 9 although there are exceptions to this rule, 10 none of which obtain in this case.

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1. Erroneously referred to as "Josephin Pasarita" and "Osephine Pasarita" in some parts of the rollo.

2.Rollo, pp. 13-36.

3.Id. at 44-55. Penned by Associate Justice Gabriel T. Robeniol with Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr., concurring.

4.Id. at 57-58.

5. See RTC Decision dated July 17, 2017, penned by Presiding Judge Consuelo Amog-Bocar; id. at 72-90.

6. Entitled "AN ACT TO ORDAIN A COOPERATIVE CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES," approved on March 10, 1990.

7. The essential elements of violation of Section 46 of RA 6938 are the following: (1) that the offender is a director, officer or committee member; and (2) that the offender willfully and knowingly: (a) votes for or assents to patently unlawful acts; (b) is guilty of gross negligence or bad faith in directing the affairs of the cooperative; or (c) acquires any personal or pecuniary interest in conflict with their duty as such directors, officers or committee member. (Asistio v. People, G.R. No. 200465, April 20, 2015.) See also rollo, pp. 51-52.

8. See rollo, pp. 52-54.

9. See Pacific Airways Corporation v. Tonda, 441 Phil. 156, 162 (2002).

10. See Spouses Aboitiz v. Spouses Po, G.R. Nos. 208450 and 208497, June 5, 2017, 825 SCRA 457, 499.