Domagsang v. Court of Appeals · G.R. 139292

Petitioner: Domagsang
Respondent: Court of Appeals
Citation: G.R. No. 139292
Court: Supreme Court
Division: Third Division
Ponente: Vitug, J.
Decided: December 5, 2000

Summary

Petitioner Domagsang was convicted by RTC and CA for violating B.P. Blg. 22 after issuing 18 bounced checks totaling P573,800.00 to creditor Garcia. The Supreme Court reversed the criminal conviction, ruling that written notice of dishonor is required under B.P. Blg. 22, not mere verbal demands. The Court emphasized strict construction of penal statutes in favor of the accused and found that the prosecution failed to formally offer the alleged written demand letter in evidence. While acquitting petitioner of criminal liability due to insufficient proof of actual knowledge of insufficient funds, the Court ordered payment of civil liability representing the face value of the checks with legal interest, recognizing the unpaid just debt to the complainant.

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Lozano v. Martinez G.R. No. L-63419
King v. People G.R. No. 131540
Yu Oh v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 125297
Alferez v. People G.R. No. 182301
Macalalag v. People G.R. No. 164358
Ongson v. People G.R. No. 156169
Medalla v. Laxa G.R. No. 193362
Nierras v. Dacuycuy G.R. No. 59568
Ada v. Viola G.R. No. 82346
People v. Chua G.R. No. 130632

Featured in research

In-depth Intellegal research that discusses this case.

Bouncing Checks Law in the Philippines (BP 22)

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · December 5, 2000

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.