324. Choa vs. People, G.R. No.

142011, 14 March 2003

FACTS:
 On April 25, 1989, Alfonso Chan Choa, Petitioner, a Chinese national filed with the RTC
Branch 41, Bacolod City a verified petition for naturalization. During the initial hearing of
the case, petitioner testified but he was not able to finish the same. However, he filed a
motion to withdraw his petition for naturalization without stating his reason which was
subsequently approved by the trial court.

 On August 5, 1992, petitioner’s wife, Leni, filed an Information before the MTCC, Branch
3, Bacolod City charging petitioner with perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal
Code:

That on or about 30th day of March, 1989, in the City of Bacolod, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the herein accused did then and there, willfully, unlawfully, feloniously and knowingly made untruthful statements or
falsehoods upon material matters required by the Revised Naturalization Law (C.A. No. 473) in his verified ‘Petition for
Naturalization’ dated April 13, 1989 (sic), 5 subscribed and sworn to before Notary Public Felomino B. Tan, Jr., who is
authorized to administer oath, which petition bears Doc. No. 140, Page No. 29, Book No. XXIII, series of 1989, in the Notarial
Register of said Notary Public, by stating therein the following, to wit:

‘5.) I am married to a Filipino. My wife’s name is Leni Ong Choa and now resides at 46 Malaspina Street, Bacolod
City. I have two (2) children whose names, dates and places of birth, and residence are as follows:

Name Date of Birth Place of Birth Residence

ALBRYAN July 19, 1981 Bacolod City 46 Malaspina St.,

ONG CHOA Bacolod City

CHERYL May 5, 1983 Bacolod City 46 Malaspina St.,

LYNNE ONG Bacolod City

CHOA

10) I am of good moral character I believe in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution. I have conducted
myself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of my residence in the Philippines in my
relations with the constituted government as well as with the community in which I am living

 CONTRARY TO AFORESAID ALLEGATIONS, said accused knew that his wife Leni Ong
Choa and their two (2) children were not then residing at said address at # 46 Malaspina
Street, Villamonte, Bacolod City, having left the aforesaid residence in 1984, or about five
(5) years earlier and were then residing at Hervias Subdivision, Bacolod City, and that
accused, while residing at 211 106 Street, Greenplains Subdivision, Bacolod City, has
been carrying on an immoral and illicit relationship with one Stella Flores Saludar, a
woman not his wife since 1984, and begetting two (2) children with her as a consequence,
as he and his wife, the private offended party herein, have long been separated from bed
and board since 1984; which falsehoods and/or immoral and improper conduct are
grounds for disqualification to become a citizen of the Philippines.

 MTCC Decision: Accused was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense which he
charged, and there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstances that may be
considered, the accused is sentenced to suffer the penalty of six (6) months and one (1)
day of prision correccional and to pay the costs.
  Petitioner filed MR contending, among others, that there is no basis to convict him of
perjury because almost two years prior to the filing of the Information, his motion to
withdraw the petition for naturalization containing the alleged false statements was
granted by the MTCC, hence, the alleged false statements were no longer existing or had
become functus officio. However, the same was denied by MTCC.

 RTC affirmed MTCC’s judgement.

 CA affirmed RTC Decision with modification re: Alfonso Choa is sentenced to suffer
imprisonment, after applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law without any aggravating or
mitigating circumstance, for a period of three (3) months of arresto mayor, to one (1) year
and eight (8) months of prision correccional.

 Hence, this Petition for Certiorari.

ISSUE:
W/N Petitioner committed perjury based on the alleged false statements he stated in his petition
for naturalization withdrawn almost two years prior to the filing of the Information for perjury.

HELD:
YES. The SC held that all elements of perjury stated under Article 138, RPC are present in the
instant case. Petitioner willfully and deliberately alleged false statements concerning his
"residence" and "moral character" in his petition for naturalization.
The elements of perjury are:

1. The accused made a statement under oath or executed an affidavit upon a material matter;

2. The statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer authorized to receive and administer oath;

3. In that statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood; and

4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law or made for a legal purpose.

The petition for naturalization was duly subscribed and sworn to by petitioner before Notary Public
Filomino B. Tan, Jr., a person competent and authorized by law to receive and administer oath.
Also, petitioner started testifying under oath on his false allegations before the trial court.
The allegations in the petition regarding "residence" and "moral character" are material matters
because they are among the very facts in issue or the main facts which are the subject of inquiry
and are the bases for the determination of petitioner’s qualifications and fitness as a naturalized
Filipino citizen.
The Court cannot go along with the submission of the petitioner and the Solicitor General that
petitioner could no longer be prosecuted for perjury in view of the withdrawal of the petition for
naturalization containing his false material statements. In this jurisdiction, it is not necessary that
the proceeding in which the perjury is alleged to have been committed be first terminated before
a prosecution for the said crime is commenced. At the time he filed his petition for naturalization,
he had committed perjury.
The instant petition for review on certiorari is DENIED. The appealed Decision of the Court of
Appeals is AFFIRMED.