5.

Elizabeth Luciaja hired the services of Hector Treas to facilitate the transfer of a mortgaged property
to her aunt. She gave P150,000 to Hector who issued a receipt and prepared a Deed of Sale with
Assumption of Mortgage. Hector gave Elizabeth Revenue Official Receipts which were discovered to
be fake. Elizabeth demanded the return of the money. Hector issued in favor of Elizabeth a check but
the same was dishonored. Treas was charged with estafa before the RTC Makati City. Allegedly due to
old age and poor health, and the fact that he lives in Iloilo City, he was unable to attend the pre-trial
and trial. RTC convicted him of Estafa under sec 1(b), of Art 315 of the RPC. CA affirmed the decision.
Treas asserts that nowhere in the evidence does it show that ₱150,000 was given to and received by
Elizabeth in Makati City. He also avers that he is not required to present evidence to prove lack of
jurisdiction, when such lack is already indicated in the prosecution evidence. Issue: WON the RTC of
Makati lacks jurisdiction over the case of estafa filed against Treas. Held: In a criminal case, the
prosecution must prove not only that the offense was committed, but also the identity of the accused and that
the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court. Although the Information says that Treas
received in trust from Elizabeth the P150,000 in the city of Makati and within the jurisdiction of RTC Makati, the
Affidavit of Complaint executed by Elizabeth does not contain allegation as to where the offense was
committed. There is nothing in the prosecution evidence which mentions that any of the elements of the
offense were committed in Makati. An objection may be raised based on the ground that the court lacks
jurisdiction over the offense charged, or it may be considered motu proprio by the court at any stage of the
proceedings or on appeal. Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a criminal case cannot be conferred upon the
court by the accused, by express waiver or otherwise. It is conferred by the sovereign authority that organized
the court and is given only by law in the manner and form prescribed by law. Sec 15 (a) of Rule 110 of the
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure of 2000 provides that subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall
be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where
any of its essential ingredients occurred. This is to ensure that the defendant is not compelled to move to, and
appear in, a different court from that of the province where the crime was committed as it would cause him
great inconvenience in looking for his witnesses and other evidence in another place. This case is referred to
the IBP Board of Governors for investigation and recommendation pursuant to Sec 1 of Rule 139-B of the
Rules of Court. (Hector Treas v. People of the Philippines, G.R.195002, Jan.25, 2012)