De Jesus v. People
This is a criminal case, entitled "Alex A. De Jesus vs. People of the Philippines and Philend Co., Inc." (G.R. No. 237996, January 10, 2019). The Supreme Court denied the petition for review on certiorari filed by Alex A. De Jesus, who was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (BP 22) or the Bouncing Checks Law. The Court of Appeals correctly upheld the Regional Trial Court's Decision affirming the Metropolitan Trial Court's finding of guilt, as all elements of the violation were present and petitioner admitted issuing the worthless checks despite knowledge of insufficient funds. The Supreme Court noted the compliance of petitioner's counsel with the Resolution dated July 2, 2018, but denied the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in its ruling.
ADVERTISEMENT
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 237996. January 10, 2019.]
ALEX A. DE JESUS, petitioner,vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND PHILEND CO., INC., respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated January 10, 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 237996 (Alex A. De Jesus v. People of the Philippines and Philend Co., Inc.). — After review, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its ruling. The CA correctly denied the petition for failure to comply with the rules and upheld the Regional Trial Court's Decision affirming the Metropolitan Trial Court's finding that petitioner is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. (BP) 22. Under BP 22, the mere issuance of a worthless check is already the offense in itself. In this case, both trial courts found the presence of all elements of the violation. Additionally, in his counter-affidavit, petitioner even admitted the issuance of the checks notwithstanding knowledge of insufficiency of funds. He stated therein that he issued the checks on account of George Philip D. Magalit's 1 assurance that the same will not be deposited on its maturity date. 2 This admission, coupled with the evidence presented by the prosecution, supports petitioner's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Resolutions dated September 17, 2017 and March 7, 2018 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 40211 are hereby AFFIRMED.
The compliance of Atty. Constantino L. Reyes, counsel for petitioner, with the Resolution dated July 2, 2018, submitting a verified statement of the material date when notice of the assailed Court of Appeals Decision was received, a clear legible duplicate original of the assailed Court of Appeals decision, and a USB containing the soft copy of the motion for extension of time to file a petition for review on certiorari, is NOTED.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. General Manager of The Philend Company, Inc., the private complainant in this case. Rollo, p. 84.
2.Id. at 54.
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU