Galvez v. People

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 260130. July 25, 2022.][Formerly UDK 17366]

P/SR. INSP. CRESENCIO GALVEZ, petitioner,vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedJuly 25, 2022, which reads as follows: HTcADC

"G.R. No. 260130 [Formerly UDK 17366] (P/Sr. Insp. Cresencio Galvez v. People of the Philippines). — The Court resolves to GRANT petitioner's motion for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period.

Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari1 filed by Police Senior Inspector (P/Sr. Insp.) Cresencio Galvez (Galvez) assailing the Decision 2 dated June 22, 2020 and the Resolution 3 dated October 21, 2021 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 39895, which affirmed the ruling of Branch 224, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City. The RTC, on the other hand, affirmed the Decision dated April 27, 2015 of Branch 39, Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Quezon City, finding Galvez guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of violation of domicile under Article 128 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). 4

The Dispositive portion of the MeTC Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the accused, P/SR. INSP. CRESENCIO GALVEZ, is hereby found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Violation of Domicile under Criminal Case No. 099927, in accordance with Article 128 of the Revised Penal Code, and is sentenced to a minimum of six (6) months of arresto mayor in its maximum period to a maximum of one (1) year, eight (8) months and twenty (20) days of the medium of prision correccional and all appropriate accessional penalties consequent thereto.

In addition, the accused is ordered to pay the private complainant, Guillermo De Lara Ambrocio[,] the amount of P25,000.00 as moral damages and P5,000.00 as exemplary damages.

SO ORDERED. 5 (Emphases and italics in the original)

On appeal, the RTC affirmed the MeTC Decision as follows:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DENIED. The assailed Decision of Metropolitan Trial Court, Quezon City, Branch 39 is AFFIRMED in TOTO.

SO ORDERED. 6

In the assailed Decision, the CA denied the Petition for Review filed by Galvez, thus:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court dated February 24, 2016 and its Order dated January 30, 2017 are AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED. 7 (Emphases in the original)

After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition of Galvez for his failure to sufficiently show any reversible error in the assailed Decision of the CA.

It is also important to note that in his petition, Galvez alleges ill motive on the part of Guillermo L. Ambrocio, and that the evidence presented by the defense shall be given greater weight. The determination of these issues involve an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the parties; therefore they are questions of fact which the Court is precluded from resolving in a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The records also do not show that the findings of fact made by the MeTC and the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, are without basis.

Nonetheless, the Court shall modify the imposed monetary awards in so far as all damages awarded shall earn interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid. 8

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated June 22, 2020 and the Resolution dated October 21, 2021 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 39895 are AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION that the award of moral damages in the amount of P25,000.00 and exemplary damages in the amount of P5,000.00 shall earn interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.

SO ORDERED."

By authority of the Court:

(SGD.) MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDivision Clerk of Court

Footnotes

1. Rollo, pp. 35-60.

2. Id. at 63-78; penned by Associate Justice Maria Elisa Sempio Diy, with Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Florencio Mallanao Mamauag, Jr., concurring.

3. Id. at 28-30.

4. Id. at 67.

5. Id.

6. Id. at 67-68.

7. Id. at 77.

8. Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267, 283 (2013).