CASE DIGEST: Apa v. Fernandez (G.R. No. 112381)

CASE DIGEST: [ G.R. No. 112381, March 20, 1995 ] ISABELO APA, MANUEL APA AND LEONILO JACALAN, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. RUMOLDO R. FERNANDEZ, HON. CELSO V. ESPINOSA, AND SPS. FELIXBERTO TIGOL, JR. AND ROSITA TAGHOY TIGOL, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS: The information alleges that “without the knowledge and consent of the owner, ROSITA TIGOL’’ petitioners occupied or took possession of a portion of “her property’’ by building their houses thereon and “deprived [her] of the use of a portion of her land to her damage and prejudice.’’ Now the ownership of the land in question, known as Lot 3635-B of the Opon cadastre covered by TCT No. 13250, is the issue in Civil Case 2247-L now pending in Branch 27 of the RTC of Lapu-Lapu City. The resolution, therefore, of this question would necessarily be determinative of petitioners’ criminal liability for squatting. In the criminal case, the question is whether petitioners occupied a piece of land not belonging to them but to private respondent and against the latter’s will.

HELD: A prejudicial question is a question which is based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately connected with it that its resolution is determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused. To justify suspension of the criminal action, it must appear not only that the civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal prosecution is based but also that the decision of the issue or issues raised in the civil case would be decisive of the guilt or innocence of the accused.