Evangeline
Ladonga vs People of the Philippines
GR
No 141066 February 17, 2005
Facts:
The
spouses Ladonga were charged to have conspired and mutually helped one another
in violating the provisions of BP Blg 22 in issuing a UCPB check on their
account, knowing fully well that the same does not have sufficient funds. The
said check was delivered to Alfredo Oculam to guarantee the loan availed of by the
spouses. Apparently, when Oculam encashed the check, the same was dishonored by
the Bank as the account of the spouses has already been closed.
This
is where Evangeline Ladonga contended that she was not a signatory of the
checks and had no participation in the issuance thereof, thus acquitting her
from the judgment against her husband. She argued that the RTC erred in finding
her criminally liable for conspiring with her husband as the principle of
conspiracy is inapplicable to BP Blg 22. The CA affirmed RTC decision, hence
the appeal.
Issue:
WON
Evangeline Ladonga is guilty of conspiracy with her husband in committing a
violation against BP Blg 22.
Held:
Principle
of conspiracy is applicable to BP Blg 22 because the RPC provides that its provisions
shall be supplementary to special laws unless the latter provides the contrary.
Apparently, BP Blg 22 does not prohibit the applicability of the suppletory
character of the provisions of RPC.
Article
10 of RPC provides that, offenses which are or in the future may be punishable
under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. This Code
shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide
the contrary.
The
first clause should be understood to mean only that the special penal laws are
controlling with regard to offenses therein specifically punished. The second
clause states that the code shall be supplementary to special laws, unless the
elater should specifically provide the contrary.
However,
the conviction of Evangeline must be set aside as conspiracy was not
established. Article 8 of the RPC provides that a conspiracy exists when two or
more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it. To be held guilty as a co-principal by reason of
conspiracy, the accused must be shown to have performed an overt act in
pursuance or furtherance of the complicity. The overt act or acts of the
accused may consist of active participation in the actual commission of the crime
itself or may consist of moral assistance to his co-conspirators by moving them
to execute or implement the criminal plan.
No comments:
Post a Comment