GR 119010; (September, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 119010 September 5, 1997
PAZ T. BERNARDO, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. OSCAR L. LEVISTE and FLORITA RONQUILLO-CONCEPCION, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Paz T. Bernardo was charged with violations of B.P. Blg. 22. After the prosecution rested its case, her counsel orally asked the trial court for “leave of court to file demurrer to evidence,” arguing insufficiency of evidence on jurisdiction and lack of notice of dishonor. The trial court, after a discussion with the prosecution regarding the evidence on record, found the grounds not well-taken and denied the motion. The court then ordered the defense to present its evidence. Instead of complying, counsel immediately asked for reconsideration. The trial court subsequently issued an order stating that by insisting on the demurrer after denial of leave, the accused was deemed to have waived her right to present evidence and submitted the case for decision based on the prosecution’s evidence.
The Court of Appeals initially set aside the trial court’s order and directed it to receive the defense’s evidence. The prosecution elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly deemed that the accused waived her right to present evidence by insisting on filing a demurrer after her request for leave to file it was denied.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s order. The ruling is based on a strict application of Section 15, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court. The rule provides that an accused may file a demurrer to evidence only with prior express leave of court. If the court denies the leave, the accused’s only right is to proceed with presenting defense evidence. If the accused nonetheless files a demurrer without such leave, or insists on it after leave is denied, she waives the right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the prosecution’s evidence.
In this case, the trial court clearly denied petitioner’s oral request for leave to file a demurrer. Her subsequent insistence, by immediately seeking reconsideration instead of presenting evidence, constituted a filing of a demurrer without the required prior leave. Judicial action on a motion for leave is discretionary. Once leave is denied and the accused still pursues the demurrer, the court loses any discretion to allow the presentation of evidence and must decide the case based on the prosecution’s evidence. The trial court, therefore, correctly applied the procedural rule.