RUSTAN ANG y PASCUA, Petitioner, vs.

However, Rustan is raising this objection to the

admissibility of the obscene picture for the first
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and IRISH
time before the Supreme Court. The objection is
SAGUD, Respondents.
too late since he should have objected to the
G.R. No. 182835; April 20, 2010 admission of the picture on such ground at the
time it was offered in evidence. He should be
Facts:
deemed to have already waived such ground for
After receiving from the accused Rustan via objection.
multimedia message service (MMS) a picture of a
Moreover, the rules he cites do not apply to the
naked woman with her face superimposed on the
present criminal action. The Rules on Electronic
figure, Complainant filed an action against said
Evidence applies only to civil actions, quasi-judicial
accused for violation of the Anti-Violence Against
proceedings, and administrative proceedings.
Women and Their Children Act or Republic Act
(R.A.) 9262. In conclusion, the Court finds that the prosecution
has proved each and every element of the crime
The sender’s cellphone number, stated in the
charged beyond reasonable doubt.
message, was 0921-8084768, one of the numbers
that Rustan used. Irish surmised that he copied the MAYOR EMMANUEL L. MALIKSI,
picture of her face from a shot he took when they Petitioner,v. COMMISSION ON
were in Baguio in 2003. The accused said to have ELECTIONS AND HOMER T.
boasted that it would be easy for him to create SAQUILAYAN, Respondents.
similarly scandalous pictures of her and threatened
BERSAMIN, J.:
to spread the picture he sent through the internet. 
The trial court later found Rustan guilty of the FACTS:
violation of Section 5(h) of R.A. 9262. On Rustan’s
appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA), the latter During the 2010 Elections, Saquilayan was
rendered a decision affirming the RTC decision. The proclaimed as winner for the position of Mayor
CA denied Rustan’s motion for reconsideration in a of Imus, Cavite. Maliksi, the candidate who
garnered the second highest number of votes,
resolution dated April 25, 2008. Thus, Rustan filed
brought an election protest in the RTC in Imus,
the present for review on certiorari.
Cavite alleging that there were irregularities in
Issue: the counting of votes in 209 clustered
precincts. Subsequently, the RTC held a
Whether or not the RTC properly admitted in revision of the votes, and, based on the results
evidence the obscene picture presented in the of the revision, declared Maliksi as the duly
case? elected Mayor of Imus commanding
Saquilayan to cease and desist from performing
Held:
the functions of said office. Saquilayan
Yes. The Supreme Court affirms the decision of the appealed to the COMELEC. In the meanwhile,
CA. the RTC granted Maliksi's motion for execution
pending appeal, and Maliksi was then installed
Rustan claims that the obscene picture sent to Irish as Mayor.
through a text message constitutes an electronic
document. Thus, it should be authenticated by The COMELEC First Division, without giving
means of an electronic signature, as provided notice to the parties, decided to recount the
under Section 1, Rule 5 of the Rules on Electronic ballots through the use of the printouts of the
Evidence (A.M. 01-7-01-SC). ballot images from the CF cards. Thus, it issued
an order dated requiring Saquilayan to deposit decryption, printing and examination of the
the amount necessary to defray the expenses digital images of the ballots were done
for the decryption and printing of the ballot inconspicuously upon motu propio directive of
images. Later, it issued another order for the COMELEC First Division sans any notice
Saquilayan to augment his cash deposit. to the petitioner and for the first time on
appeal.
The First Division nullified the decision of the
RTC and declared Saquilayan as the duly HELD: The decision of the court a quo is
elected Mayor. granted.

Maliksi filed a motion for reconsideration, POLITICAL LAW notice to parties

alleging that he had been denied his right to
due process because he had not been notified of Based on the pronouncement in Alliance of
the decryption proceedings. He argued that the Barangay Concerns (ABC) v. Commission on
resort to the printouts of the ballot images, Elections, the power of the COMELEC to adopt
which were secondary evidence, had been procedures that will ensure the speedy
unwarranted because there was no proof that resolution of its cases should still be exercised
the integrity of the paper ballots had not been only after giving to all the parties the
preserved. opportunity to be heard on their opposing
claims. The parties right to be heard upon
The COMELEC En Banc denied Maliksi's MR. adversarial issues and matters is never to be
waived or sacrificed, or to be treated so lightly
Maliksi then came to the Court via petition for because of the possibility of the substantial
certiorari, reiterating his objections to the prejudice to be thereby caused to the parties, or
decryption, printing, and examination of the to any of them. Thus, the COMELEC En Banc
ballot images without prior notice to him, and should not have upheld the First Divisions
to the use of the printouts of the ballot images deviation from the regular procedure in the
in the recount proceedings conducted by the guise of speedily resolving the election protest,
First Division. in view of its failure to provide the parties with
notice of its proceedings and an opportunity to
The Supreme Court via petition for certiorari be heard, the most basic requirements of due
dismissed the same. The Court then process.
pronounced that the First Division did not
abuse its discretion in deciding to use the ballot The picture images of the ballots are electronic
images instead of the paper ballots, explaining documents that are regarded as the equivalents
that the printouts of the ballot images were not of the original official ballots themselves.In
secondary images, but considered original Vinzons-Chato v. House of Representatives
documents with the same evidentiary value as Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No. 199149, January
the official ballots under the Rule on Electronic 22, 2013the Court held that "the picture images
Evidence; and that the First Divisions finding of the ballots, as scanned and recorded by the
that the ballots and the ballot boxes had been PCOS, are likewise official ballots that faithfully
tampered had been fully established by the capture in electronic form the votes cast by the
large number of cases of double-shading voter, as defined by Section 2(3) of R.A. No.
discovered during the revision. 9369. As such, the printouts thereof are the
functional equivalent of the paper ballots filled
ISSUE: Whether the Supreme Court erred in out by the voters and, thus, may be used for
dismissing the instant petition despite a clear purposes of revision of votes in an electoral
violation of petitioner's constitutional right to protest."
due process of law considering that
That the two documents the official ballot and apparently left behind by Enojas. The police officers
its picture image are considered "original monitored the incoming messages and posed as
documents" simply means that both of them Enojas. The accused appellants were later on
are given equal probative weight. In short, arrested in an entrapment operation and were
when either is presented as evidence, one is not convicted of murder by RTC Las Pinas.
considered as weightier than the other.
Issues:
But this juridical reality does not authorize the
courts, the COMELEC, and the Electoral 1. Whether or not the evidence of the text
Tribunals to quickly and unilaterally resort to messages were inadmissible, not having
the printouts of the picture images of the been properly identified.
ballots in the proceedings had before them
without notice to the parties. Despite the equal 2. Whether or not circumstantial evidence
probative weight accorded to the official ballots alone is sufficient to attain a conviction.
and the printouts of their picture images, the
rules for the revision of ballots adopted for Held:
their respective proceedings still consider the
official ballots to be the primary or best 1. As to the admissibility of the text messages,
evidence of the voters will. In that regard, the the RTC admitted them in conformity with
picture images of the ballots are to be used only the Court’s earlier Resolution applying the
when it is first shown that the official ballots Rules on Electronic Evidence to criminal
are lost or their integrity has been actions. Text messages are to be proved by
compromised. the testimony of a person who was a party
to the same or has personal knowledge of
PEOPLE V ENOJAS (GR No. 204894, March 10, them. Here, PO3 Cambi, posing as the
2014) accused Enojas, exchanged text messages
with the other accused in order to identify
Facts: PO2 Gregorio and PO2 Pangilinan were and entrap them. As the recipient of those
patrolling the vicinity of Toyota Alabang and SM messages sent from and to the mobile
Southmall when they spotted a suspiciously parked phone in his possession, PO3 Cambi had
taxi. They approached the taxi driver Enojas and personal knowledge of such messages and
asked for his documents. Having entertained was competent to testify on them.
doubts regarding the veracity of documents shown
them, they invited him in their mobile car to the 2. This may be true but the prosecution could
police station for further questioning. Enojas prove their liability by circumstantial
complied leaving his taxi behind. Upon reaching 7- evidence that meets the evidentiary
11 on Zapote-Alabang Road, they stopped and PO2 standard of proof beyond reasonable
Pangilinan went down to relieve himself there. As doubt. It has been held that circumstantial
he approached the store’s door, however, he came evidence is sufficient for conviction if: 1)
upon two suspected robbers and a shootout there is more than one circumstance; 2)
ensued. PO2 Pangilinan shot one suspect dead and the facts from which the inferences are
hit the other who still managed to escape. But derived are proven; and 3) the
someone fired at PO2 Pangilinan causing his death. combination of all the circumstances is
PO2 Gregorio was also engaged in a shootout with such as to produce a conviction beyond
two more armed robbers who managed to escape. reasonable doubt.
He then went back to the patrol car and noticed
that Enojas fled. Suspecting that Enojas was Here the totality of the circumstantial
involved in the attempted robbery, they searched evidence the prosecution presented
his abandoned taxi and found a mobile phone
 sufficiently provides basis for the conviction ₱1,000.00 monthly. When respondents failed to
of all the accused. fulfill their obligation despite repeated demands,
BPI was constrained to give a final demand
ANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Petitioner  letter to respondents.
vs AMADO M. MENDOZA and MARIA MARCOS
VDA. DE MENDOZA, Respondents Respondents maintained that Amado only
affixed his signature in the letter dated July 18,
G.R. No. 198799 1997 in order to acknowledge its receipt, but not
to give his consent to the application of the
YEAR: 2012 proceeds of their time deposit account to their
purported obligations to BPI.
TOPIC: Negotiable Instruments
DOCTRINE Issue: Whether or not BPI failed to prove the
dishonor of the subject check
Facts: This case stemmed from a Complaint for Held: Yes.
Sum of Money with Application for Writ of
Attachment filed by BPI against respondents Ratio: It is settled that in civil cases, the party
before the RTC. BPI alleged that on April 8, 1997, having the burden of proof must produce a
respondents opened a foreign currency savings preponderance of evidence thereon. Records
account (US savings account) at BPI-Gapan evince that BPI was able to satisfactorily prove by
Branch and deposited therein the total amount
preponderance of evidence the existence of
of US$l6,264.00, broken down as follows:
respondents' obligation in its favor. Verily, Amado
US$100.00 in cash and US$16,164.00 in US
Treasury Check with No. 3149-09693369 acknowledged its existence and expressed his
payable to "Ma. Marcos Vda. de Mendoza" conformity thereto when he voluntarily: (a) affixed
(subject check) and placed the amount of his signature in the letters dated June 27, 1997 and
US$2,000.00 in a time deposit account. After the July 18, 1997, where he acknowledged the
clearing period, respondents withdrew the dishonor of the subject check, and subsequently,
amount of US$16,244.00 from the US savings allowed BPI to apply the proceeds of their US time
account, leaving only US$20.00 for bank
deposit account to partially offset their obligation
charges. However, on June 26, 1997, BPI
to the bank; and (b) executed a Promissory
received a notice from its correspondent bank,
Bankers Trust Company New York (Bankers Note dated September 8, 1997 wherein he
Trust), that the subject check was dishonored undertook to pay BPI in installments of ₱l,000.00
due to "amount altered" as evidenced by (1) an per month until the remaining balance of his
electronic mail (e-mail) advice from Bankers obligation is fully paid.
Trust, and (2) a photocopy of the subject check
with a notation "endorsement cancelled" by
Bankers Trust.
FACTS:
This prompted BPI to inform respondents of On April 8, 1997, respondents: (a) opened a foreign
such dishonor and to demand reimbursement. currency savings (US savings account) at BPI-Gapan
BPI then claimed that on July 18, 1997, Branch and deposited therein the total amount of
respondents allowed BPI to apply the proceeds
US$ 16,264.00, in US Treasury Check payable to
of their time deposit account in the amount
ofUS$2,015.00 to their outstanding obligation "Ma. Marcos Vda. de Mendoza" (subject check);
and that upon the exhaustion of the said time and (b) placed the amount of US$2,000.00 in a time
deposit account, Amado gave BPI a promissory deposit account. After the lapse of the thirty (30)
note dated September 8, 1997 containing his day clearing period on May 9 and 13, 1997,
promise to pay BPI-Gapan Branch the amount of respondents withdrew the amount of
US$16,244.00 from the US savings account, leaving FACTS: Yes. The Supreme Court finds the petition
only US$20.00 for bank charges. meritorious. Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of
Court reads: Section 3. Original document must be
On June 26, 1997, BPI received a notice from its
produced; exceptions. - When the subject of
correspondent bank, Bankers Trust Company New
inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence
York (Bankers Trust), that the subject check was
shall be admissible other than the original
dishonored due to "amount altered", as evidenced
document itself, except in the following cases: (a)
by (1) an electronic mail (e-mail) advice from
When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
Bankers Trust, and (2) a photocopy of the subject
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on
check with a notation "endorsement cancelled" by
the part of the offeror; In order to fall under the
Bankers Trust as the original copy of the subject
aforesaid exception, it is crucial that the offeror
check was allegedly confiscated by the government
proves: (a) the existence or due execution of the
of the United States of America (US government).
original; (b) the loss and destruction of the original,
This prompted BPI to inform respondents of such or the reason for its non-production in court; and
dishonor and to demand reimbursement. BPI then (c) the absence of bad faith on the part of the
claimed that: (a) on July 18, 1997, respondents offeror to which the unavailability of the original
allowed BPI to apply the proceeds of their time can be attributed. In this case, BPI sufficiently
deposit account in the amount of US$2,015.00 to complied with the foregoing requisites.
their outstanding obligation; (b) upon the
First, the existence or due execution of the subject
exhaustion of the said time deposit account,
check was admitted by both parties. Second, the
Amado gave BPI a promissory note dated
reason for the non-presentation of the original
September 8, 1997 containing his promise to pay
copy of the subject check was justifiable as it was
BPI-Gapan Branch the amount of P1,000.00
confiscated by the US government for being an
monthly; and (c) when respondents failed to fulfill
altered check. The subject check, being a US
their obligation despite repeated demands, BPI was
Treasury Warrant, is not an ordinary check, and
constrained to give a final demand letter to
practically speaking, the same could not be easily
respondents on November 27, 1997.
obtained. Lastly, absent any proof to the contrary
In a Decision dated May 9, 2007, the RTC ruled in and for the reasons already stated, no bad faith can
BPI's favor. Aggrieved, respondents appealed to be attributed to BPI for its failure to present the
the CA. In a Decision dated February 4, 2011, the original of the subject check. Thus, applying the
CA reversed and set aside the RTC's ruling, and exception to the Best Evidence Rule, the
consequently, dismissed BPI's complaint for lack of presentation of the photocopy of the subject check
merit. It held that BPI failed to prove the dishonor as secondary evidence was permissible.
of the subject check, since: (a) the presentation of
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The
a mere photocopy of the subject check is in
Decision dated February 4, 2011 and the
violation of the Best Evidence Rule; and (b) the e-
Resolution dated August 26, 2011 of the Court of
mail advice from Bankers Trust was not properly
Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 91704 is hereby
authenticated in accordance with the Rules on
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Decision dated May
Electronic Evidence as the person who sent the e-
9, 2007 of the Regional Trial Court of Gapan City,
mail advice was neither identified nor presented in
Nueva Ecija, Branch 87 in Civil Case No. 1913 is
court.
REINSTATED with MODIFICATION, adjusting the
ISSUE: Whether or not the BPI had proven its cause interest imposed on the amount ordered to be
of action by preponderance of evidence. returned, i.e., P369, 600.51, to six percent (6%) per
annum reckoned from the date of extrajudicial
demand on June 27, 1997, until fully paid.