Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GO VS. DIMAGIBA
Facts
Fernando L. Dimagiba issued to Susan Go 13
checks. Go presented the checks to the drawee
bank for encashment but were dishonored due to
the reason account closed. Dimagiba was
prosecuted for the violation of BP 22.
MTCC convicted him of the case. Dimagiba
appealed to the RTC. RTC denied the appeal and
sustained the conviction. No further appeal was
brought to the CA. RTC issued a Certificate of
Finality. MTCC issued an order directing the arrest
of Dimagiba for the service of his sentence. A Writ
of Execution was issued to enforce his civil
liability.
Dimagiba filed a Motion for Reconsideration.
MTCC denied the motion.
He filed with the RTC a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus. RTC issued an Order directing the
immediate release of Dimagiba from confinement
and requiring him to pay a fine of P100,000 in
lieu of imprisonment. RTC invoked Vaca v. Court
of Appeals and Supreme Court Administrative
Circular (SC-AC) No. 12-2000, which allegedly
required the imposition of a fine only instead of
imprisonment also for BP 22 violations, if the
accused was not a recidivist or a habitual
delinquent. The RTC held that this rule should be
retroactively applied in favor of Dimagiba.
Issue
Whether or not the petition for writ of habeas
corpus was validly granted
Held
NO, it was not validly granted.
Ratio