Tolentino v. People

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 240310. August 6, 2018.]

WILBERT TOLENTINO, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, EVA ROSE PUA, JUDGE MARIA LUISA LESLE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 90, QUEZON CITY, respondents.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated August 6, 2018which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 240310 — Wilbert Tolentino v. People of the Philippines, Eva Rose Pua, Judge Maria Luisa Lesle, Regional Trial Court, Branch 90, Quezon City.

This Court has carefully reviewed the allegations, issues, and arguments adduced in the instant Petition for Certiorari with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and accordingly resolves to DISMISS the same for: (1) failure to state the date of receipt of the assailed Order dated March 19, 2018 as required by Sec. 3, Rule 46 of the Rules of Court; and (2) failure to sufficiently show that the Regional Trial Court gravely abused its discretion in rendering the Orders dated March 19, 2018 1 and June 18, 2018 2 in Criminal Case No. R-QZN-17-14518-CR.

Petitioner claims that the assailed Orders violate Section 14, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution for failing to state clearly and distinctly the facts and law on which the assailed Orders are based. In NICOS Industrial Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 3 we reiterated the time-honored principle that "the constitutional provision does not apply to interlocutory orders" 4 such as the RTC's March 19, 2018 Order denying petitioner's motion to quash "because the provision 'refers only to decisions on the merits and not to orders of the trial court resolving incidental matters.'" 5

Anent petitioner's claim that the action has prescribed, although Republic Act (RA) No. 10175, or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, does not categorically state the prescriptive period for such action, the new prescriptive period for the crime of libel in relation to RA No. 10175 can be derived from the penalty imposed on the said crime. Section 6 of RA No. 10175 provides that the "penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended, and special laws, as the case may be." As such, the former penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods is increased to prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period. The new penalty, therefore, becomes afflictive, following Section 25 6 of the RPC. Corollarily, following Article 90 7 of the RPC, the crime of libel in relation to RA 10175 now prescribes in fifteen (15) years. Thus, respondent Eva Rose Pua's filing of the complaint on August 8, 2017 against petitioner's Facebook post dated April 29, 2015 was well within the prescriptive period for libel in relation to RA 10175.

Lastly, on the issue of jurisdiction, Section 21 of RA 10175 vests the RTC with jurisdiction without any qualification as to the place where the same should be filed. Section 21 states: cSaATC

Section 21. Jurisdiction. — The Regional Trial Court shall have jurisdiction over any violation of the provisions of this Act including any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission. Jurisdiction shall lie if any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or partly situated in the country, or when by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was committed, was in the Philippines.

There shall be designated special cybercrime courts manned by specially trained judges to handle cybercrime cases.

Given that there is no qualification as to where a criminal action for libel in relation to RA 10175 must be filed, the filing of the Information before the RTC of Quezon City, where respondent Eva Rose Pua resides, is proper. This is in accordance with Section 2, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, which provides that "[a]ll other actions may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs reside, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants reside, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff."

ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the Orders dated March 19, 2018 and June 18, 2018 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 90, Quezon City in Criminal Case No. R-QZN-17-14518-CR.

The Manifestation filed by petitioner is NOTED.

SO ORDERED." Leonardo-de Castro, J., designated as Acting Chairperson of the First Division per Special Order No. 2559 dated May 11, 2018; Gesmundo, J., designated as Acting Member of the First Division per Special Order No. 2560 dated May 11, 2018.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENAActing Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1.Rollo, p. 133. Penned by Acting Pairing Judge Wilfredo L. Maynigo.

2.Id. at 146. Penned by Acting Presiding Judge Maria Luisa Lesle G. Gonzales-Betic.

3. 283 Phil. 12 (1992).

4.Id. at 18.

5.Id., citing Mendoza v. Court of First Instance, 151-A Phil. 815, 827 (1973).

6. ARTICLE 25. Penalties Which May Be Imposed. — The penalties which may be imposed, according to this Code, and their different classes, are those included in the following:

   Scale

   Principal Penalties

   Capital punishment:

   Death.

   Afflictive penalties:

   Reclusión perpetua,

   Reclusión temporal,

   Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,

   Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,

   Prisión mayor.

   Correctional penalties:

   Prisión correccional,

   Arresto mayor,

   Suspensión,

   Destierro.

   Light penalties:

   Arresto menor,

   Public censure.

   Penalties common to the three preceding classes:

   Fine, and

   Bond to keep the peace.

7. ARTICLE 90. Prescription of Crimes. — Crimes punishable by death, reclusión perpetua or reclusión temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.

   Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years.

   Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in five years.

   The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.

   The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months.

   Light offenses prescribe in two months.

   When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first, second and third paragraphs of this article.