A Case Digest by: Salvador V.

Santos III
Sched: CRIM LAW 6-9 PM

PEOPLE V LADONGA
Sunday, August 28, 2022
9:47 PM

F:
 This is an action of the petitioner for being convicted of Special Penal Law B.P. Bldg 22 or The
Bouncing Check Law.

 On sometime in May or June 1990 the Ladonga spouses obtained three checks for their loan
guaranteed by United Coconut Planter Bank (UCPB) and issued to Ladonga from Mr. Alfred
Oculam; as follows:
o ₱9,075.55 Check No. 284743,
o ₱12,730.00 Check No. 284744
o ₱8,496.55 Check No. 106136

 Three of the checks above mentioned bounced because there was no sufficient deposit or the
account was closed and they were guilty of violating Special Penal Law B.P, Bldg. 22.

 Adronico applied for probation and was granted. At the same time, the petitioner Evangeline
Lodonga brought the case to the Court of Appeals on the grounds as follows: (1) That she is not a
signatory of the checks and (2) had no participation in the issuance. However, the Court of
Appeals denied their petition claiming that even if the petitioner did not make an issue or sign the
checks did not exculpate her from criminal liability as it is not indispensable that a co-conspirator
takes a direct part in every act and knows the part which everyone performed.

 The petitioner sought reconsideration of the decision.

I: Whether or not the accused is guilty of the Special Penal Law B.P. Bldg 22.

R: No. She is not guilty of the Special Penal Law B.P. Bldg 22.

Under Article 8 of the RPC stated: "To be held guilty as a co-principal by reason of conspiracy, the
accused must be shown to have performed an overt act in pursuance or furtherance of the complicity."
However, the conspiracy must be established, not by conjectures, but by positive and conclusive
evidence; In this case, The evidence falls short of the quantum of proof required for conviction.

Therefore, the accused is not guilty.