Bernardo vs. CA, 278 SCRA 782
Bernardo vs. CA, 278 SCRA 782
*
G.R. No. 119010. September 5, 1997.
____________________
* FIRST DIVISION.
783
784
court.
BELLOSILLO, J.:
__________________
785
___________________
786
COURT:
Alright, prosecution having rested, defense will
now present its evidence. Proceed.
ATTY. MIRAVITE:
Your honor, we respectfully ask for a resetting,
for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence
(italics supplied).
COURT:
On what ground?
ATTY. MIRAVITE:
On the ground that the prosecution failed to
elicit the fact where the checks were issued and
where they were actually dishonored. This is
material, your honor, for purposes of
determining jurisdiction. Also, your honor, as
we mentioned in our comments to the evidence
presented by the prosecution, there has been no
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
787
COURT:
So, that takes jurisprudence. The elements
happened in Quezon City.
PRIVATE PROSECUTOR:
Yes, your honor.
ATTY. MIRAVITE:
The notation read by counsel, your honor, was
not marked in evidence, what was marked is B-
4 appearing at the dorsal portion of the check
which pertains only for (sic) the dishonor, the
initial and the date. Nothing was presented as
to the fact. If that is so, that was indeed
deposited at West Avenue, Quezon City.
PRIVATE PROSECUTOR:
There is, your honor. The stamp received by the
Cashier Division, PNB, Quezon City, West
Avenue.
COURT:
Anyway, was there an offer of that document?
PRIVATE PROSECUTOR:
Yes, there was an offer of exhibit A-4, your
honor. The record would show that we
manifested that exhibit B-4 are stamps of the
bank reading DAIF over which there are other
stamps.
COURT:
You are saying that the word DAIF was marked
at the back and offered as proof of the dishonor
and the place was evidence?
PRIVATE PROSECUTOR:
Yes, your honor, immediately on top of the word,
DAIF.
COURT:
Is there any evidence testimonial that these
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
788
COURT:
Is there any evidence presented that these
checks were not paid up to now?
PRIVATE PROSECUTOR:
Yes, your honor. First, is the oral testimony of
the witness, that it has not been paid; second,
exhibits 1 and 1-1, which is the Complaint
Affidavit of the witness.
COURT:
Alright, in view of the objections, and in view of
the manifestations of the private prosecutor, the
defense grounds for demurrer, the same not
being well taken is hereby DENIED (italics
supplied). You will now present your evidence.
ATTY. MIRAVITE:
If your honor please, may we just ask for a
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
789
COURT:
You may include that in your motion for
reconsideration. Alright, the prosecution having
rested, and the defense having been considered to
have waived his right to present his evidence,
this case is deemed submitted for decision. Set
the promulgation of this case to June 6, 19946at
8:30 o’clock in the morning (italics supplied).
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
___________________
790
_____________________
791
____________________
792
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
____________________________
793
——o0o——
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/17
10/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 278
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016df66b93b10f909111003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 17/17