RUSTAN ANG y PASCUA, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and IRISH SAGUD GR No. 182835

RUSTAN ANG y PASCUA, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and IRISH SAGUD

GR No. 182835

Nature: Rules on Electronic Evidence

Facts

Irish Sagud and Rustan were classmates at Wesleyan University in Aurora. They became “on-and-off” sweethearts towards the end of 2004. Irish learned that Rustan had taken a live-in partner (now his wife), whom he had gotten pregnant. Irish broke up with Rustan.

Before Rustan got married, he tried to convince Irish to elope with him. Irish rejected the proposal. Irish changed her cellphone number but Rustan managed to get hold of it and sent her text messages. Rustan used two cellphone numbers. Irish to ask him to leave her alone.

Irish received a multimedia message service (MMS) a picture of a naked woman with spread legs and with Irish’s face superimposed on the figure. The sender was 0921-8084768, one of the numbers that Rustan used. Irish got other text messages from Rustan. He boasted that it would be easy for him to create similarly scandalous pictures of her. And he threatened to spread the picture through the internet.

Irish sought the help of the vice mayor of Maria Aurora who referred her to the police. Under police supervision, Irish contacted Rustan through the cellphone numbers he used. Irish asked Rustan to meet her at a resort. When Rustan was walking towards Irish, police officers intercepted and arrested him. They searched him and seized his cellphone and several SIM cards.

Rustan admitted having courted Irish. He claimed that after their relation ended, Irish wanted reconciliation. Sometime later, Rustan got a text message from Irish, asking him to meet her at as she needed his help in selling her cellphone. When he arrived at the place, two police officers approached him, seized his cellphone and the contents of his pockets, and brought him to the police station.

Rustan further claims that Irish asked him to help her identify a prankster who was sending her malicious text messages. Rustan got the sender’s number and, pretending to be Irish, contacted the person. Rustan claims that he got back obscene messages from the prankster, which he forwarded to Irish from his cellphone. This is why the obscene messages appeared to have originated from him. Rustan claims that it was Irish herself who sent the obscene picture to him. He presented six pictures of a woman whom he identified as Irish.

RTC found Rustan guilty of the violation of Section 5(h) of R.A. 9262. On appeal CA affirm the RTC decision.

Issue:

Whether or not electronic evidence will apply to criminal cases.  

Held:

Yes. Pursuant to A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC issued on 24 September 2002, Section 2 Rule 1 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence was amended to read as follows:

SEC. 2 Cases covered. – These Rules shall apply to the criminal and civil actions and proceeding, as well as quasi-judicial and administrative cases.