VILLAREAL v ALIGA

Peralta, J:
FACTS: Dennis VIllareal is the President and General Manager of Gentrade Inc.,
and respondent Consuelo Aliga was one of his accounting clerks. Respondent has
custody of Villareals personal checks and is in charge of typing its contents and
submitting them for signature before encashment of the same. Sometime in
October 1996, Villareal learned of Aligas falsification of checks by increasing their
amount. She was caught in an operation by NBI agents when she encashed three
falsified checks. When summoned by VIllareal in his office, respondent arrived and
executed a statement voluntarily giving back the amount of P60,000 to Villareal in
the presence of his lawyers. Aliga was found guilty by the RTC, but the judgment
was reversed by the CA.
ISSUE: W/N Villareal may assail the judgment of acquittal
RULING:
YES, but Villareal lacks legal standing.
The People may assail a judgment of acquittal only via petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 of the Rules. If the petition, regardless of its nomenclature, merely calls
for an ordinary review of the findings of the court a quo, the constitutional right of
the accused against double jeopardy would be violated. A petition for review
on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court and a petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 of the Rules of Court are two and separate remedies. A petition under
Rule 45 brings up for review errors of judgment, while a petition
for certiorari under Rule 65 covers errors of jurisdiction or grave abuse of
discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction. Grave abuse of discretion is
not an allowable ground under Rule 45. A petition for review under Rule 45 of the
Rules of Court is a mode of appeal. Under Section 1 of Rule 45:
Section 1. Filing of petition with Supreme Court. A party desiring to appeal
by certiorari from a judgment or final order or resolution of the Court of Appeals,
the Sandiganbayan, the Regional
Trial Court, or other courts whenever
authorized by law, may file with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review
on certiorari. The petition shall raise only questions of law which must be
distinctly set forth.
However, the provision must be read in relation to Section 1, Rule 122 of the
Revised Rules of Court, which provides that any party may appeal from a
judgment or final order "unless the accused will thereby be placed in double
jeopardy." The judgment that may be appealed by the aggrieved party envisaged
in the Rule is a judgment convicting the accused, and not a judgment of acquittal.
The State is barred from appealing such judgment of acquittal by a petition for
review.
Side note: The authority to represent the State in appeals of criminal cases before
the Supreme Court and the CA is solely vested in the Office of the Solicitor
General. The petition should have been filed by the State through the OSG, not
Villareal.