The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) days after the prosecution rests its case. (Rule 119, Section 23 of the Rules of Court)


BDO v. Chua
G.R. No. 237553, July 10, 2019

Facts:

The prosecution filed its Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence on August 20, 2014. In the prayer, the prosecution stated: "In the event that the Honorable Court will deny the admission of any of the foregoing exhibits offered, it is respectfully prayed that the Honorable Court grant plaintiff People of the Philippines an opportunity to present additional evidence."

On September 12, 2014, the court admitted the prosecution's evidence. In the same Order, the trial court gave the accused 10 days to comment on the prosecution's evidence. On September 25, 2014, the accused filed his Comment.

Later, on October 13, 2014, the accused filed a Motion for Leave to file Demurrer to Evidence, attached to which was his Demurrer to Evidence. On October 30, 2014, the prosecution filed its Opposition, arguing that the Motion for Leave should be expunged from the records for being filed beyond the five (5)-day reglementary period under Rule 119, Section 23 of the Rules of Court.

On November 26, 2014, the trial court issued an Order granting the Demurrer to Evidence. Based on the records and the witnesses' testimonies, it found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused.


Issue:

Whether the trial court erred in not dismissing outright the Motion for Leave and Demurrer to Evidence for being filed out of time.


Held:

The trial court erred in not dismissing outright the Motion for Leave and Demurrer. 

"The prayer in the Formal Offer of Evidence itself indicates that the prosecution would rest its case depending on whether the trial court admitted its evidence. If the trial court did not admit its evidence, the prosecution would present additional evidence; otherwise, it would rest its case. Due to this reservation, the five (5)-day period for the filing of a Motion for Leave had not yet started when petitioner filed its Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence.

The prosecution is deemed to have rested its case on September 12, 2014, when the trial court admitted its documentary evidence. In Cabador v. People, this Court held that "only after [the court ruled on the prosecution's formal offer of documentary evidence] could the prosecution be deemed to have rested its case."

However, the counting of the five (5)-day period did not commence on August 20, 2014, when the prosecution filed its Formal Offer of Documentary Evidence; or on September 12, 2014, when the trial court admitted the evidence. Instead, it started upon respondent's receipt of the September 12, 2014 Order, for only then was he notified that the prosecution had rested its case.

Nonetheless, respondent filed his Motion for Leave and Demurrer to Evidence on October 13, 2014. To recall, the September 12, 2014 Order had also directed respondent to submit his comment/opposition, which he then submitted on September 25, 2014. Even if there is no record of when respondent received a copy of the Order, it can be surmised that he received it before September 25, 2014. It follows that the Motion for Leave and the Demurrer to Evidence were filed beyond the five (5)-day period under Rule 119, Section 23 of the Rules of Court. The trial court, then, should have denied these pleadings outright."