G.R. No. 85999 October 2, 1989
LUZ C. OÑAS, petitioner, vs. THE SANDIGANBAYAN and THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

FACTS

Luz Oñas was charged with malversation of public funds before the Sandiganbayan. After the prosecution rested its case, Oñas, through counsel, waived her right to present defense evidence and was granted leave to file a demurrer to evidence. Her filed demurrer explicitly reserved her right to adduce evidence should it be denied. The Sandiganbayan, applying Section 15, Rule 119 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, overruled the demurrer. It held that by filing it, she waived her right to present evidence. Consequently, the court proceeded to convict Oñas based solely on the prosecution’s evidence and sentenced her accordingly.

ISSUE

Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in applying the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, which deemed the filing of a demurrer as a waiver of the right to present evidence, instead of the favorable 1988 amendments which took effect after her conviction but before her appeal.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the Sandiganbayan’s decision. The Court applied the 1988 amendments to the Rules on Criminal Procedure retroactively, as they are procedural and favorable to the accused. The amended Section 15, Rule 119 explicitly provides that if an accused files a demurrer to evidence with prior leave of court, and it is denied, the accused retains the right to present evidence. A waiver of this right occurs only if the demurrer is filed without express leave.
Oñas’s situation fell squarely under the amended rule. She sought and was granted leave to file her demurrer, and she made an express reservation to present evidence upon its denial. Therefore, under the applicable 1988 rule, she did not waive her right to adduce evidence. The Sandiganbayan’s conviction based solely on the prosecution’s evidence, after denying her demurrer, was a grave error. The case was remanded to the Sandiganbayan for the reception of Oñas’s defense evidence.